Bachmann China has been making a range of Chinese models for quite a few years now - the SY tourist loco is an Americanised version of a model originally produced for the Chinese domestic market - that applies to both the model and the prototypel!

Only a few models from the Chinese range have ever been released in the USA. However the full range is imported into the UK so the Bachmann British site is a good place to check as it is in English.http://www.bachmann.co.uk

It should be noted that not all freight cars released by Bachmann China are authentic Chinese prototypes although some certainly are - there is or was
a budget range that consisted of  repainted USA models.

Another good site for those interested in modelling Chinese is Peter Haworth's http://home.iprimus.com.au/unionrr/3b.html#bachmann This has descriptions of the Bachmann, and other, Chinese models.

Hamish

I can't see the picture so I can't be sure - my guess would be the Beattie 2-4-0t well tank  class. These were originally introduced in 1862 for the London and South Western Railway and 3 survived in regular service on a branch line until about 1962. By then they were owned by British Railways.

Hamish

The only real reason to produce the Peach Bottom loco would be as a spin-off from a South Park 2-6-6t.

The best choice for an EASTERN Mason bogie would be the Boston, Revere Beach and Lynn 2-4-4t's. These were numerous and lastest a long time. The Peach Bottom loco was a solo example and had a short life (2 or 3 years).

The difficulty is that if a Mason Bogie is made that is not a South Park loco the Colorado fanatics will run amok!  I suspect that the B,RB&L locos are too different in general, as well as having a different wheel arrangement,  for much common tooling with a South Park loco to be possible.

Hamish

Quote from: ebtnut on March 27, 2007, 02:57:47 PM
I think I should qualify things a bit--there are in fact track and wheel standards for On30--they are the same as for HO.  For clearances in general, the On3 standards should be considered.  However, as with most narrow gauge modeling, you have some discretion depending on your particular prototype. 

To elaborate a little - the NMRA does indicate using HO track and wheel standards for ON30 and the scale (1:48), but covers little else I think. (The track and wheel standrds are what I was referring to when I said the NMRA had issued some On30 standards.)

On clearances, ON3 standards are designed to suit the largest North American 3 foot prototypes. This is fine if that is what you a running, D&RGW K series mikados and the like. However if you are running small prototypes, says Porters, small geared locomoives (e.g. the Bachmann ones) and small rolling stock, such as that available from BVM and others, the ON3 clearances, to my mind, look wrong. Real narrow gauge railroads were often built as cheaply as possible, over generous clearances for cuttings, tunnels etc. would have cost money and thus are unlikely (I know some-one will come up with a long list of exceptions,  I am generalising)

To the Kid

I like your approach. But I would point out, to return to the point of the original post on this thread, that both the height and size of the Bachmann couplers are prototypical for some prototypes.

The bottom line is, as always, it's your railroad, do what you like.

Hamish

Andy

Have you a scenario for your layout? What part of Canada is it set in and what sort of country e.g. urban?, prairie? You mention adding a roundhouse and yard, is this for a terminal or an intermediate depot?

I ask because I like intergrating operations into the design of a layout. For example if your scenario was a main line in prairie country passing through a middle sized town you could have long distance through trains (both passenger and freight, and local (terminating)  freight and passenger trains as well.  These would require turning the loco and some switching. I suggested adding a factory or something before, a prairie setting would indicate a grain terminal, so grain trains would be needed.  For other scenarios, adapt as appropriate. I like sequenced operations, that is drawing up a timetable of trains and operating them in order. I generally find this more satisfying than just running trains at random (although I do that sometimes). I don't however time my trains.

If you decide to move off the floor the design will obviously be different, but the approach could be the same, develop a scenario, run trains to suit and design the layout accordingly. If you have scenery this would reflect the scenario, but the scenario can be imagined and still provide a rationale for running the trains you choose.

As I said before, this is just  my approach, you may choose to do something entirely different.

Hamish

Quote from: Seasaltchap on March 25, 2007, 03:43:23 PM

For the world record, it will probably be claimed by Western Australia.

Not quite - Western Australia and South Australia -  the straight stretch crosses the State border. The straight distance is 309 miles. Sources generally state that this  is believed to be the longest in the world - any-one know of any longer?

Hamish

I can't tell you how to have fun, we all get our fun in different ways!

However I have never built a layout like yours because I would consider operation too limited. I think you need to consider some additions, how about some factories, or warehouses etc. in the centre of the oval with spur tracks? Then you can spot cars, marshall trains and so on. I would acquire a small industrial swithcher (the 0-6-0t is nice if you can find one) to use as a short line loco, this can add to operational interest. Cars are dropped off by your mainline  freight train, picked up by the shunter, exchanged fo other cars at the factories etc. and then returned to be added to the main line freight.

Just one possibility.

Hamish

Quote from: br549 on March 26, 2007, 05:50:51 PM
I have asked this question at numerous forums and haven't recieved an answer yet. It almost seems to be a taboo subject. And was ridiculed  & shunned for asking about it as well.
Just for curiosity  and Not "nit picking"...I am asking any NMRA members to answer this question please!
Has there been any standards set for 0n30?It seems that
All of the other MRR scales have standards set by the NMRA for people whom wish to follow standards. The Module groups have formed  in 0n30 so something has to be standard, Or???

Standards and ON30 - as you have discovered this is controversial! No I am not an NMRA memeber but I will offer some comments. The NMRA does publish a few standards for ON30, but they are not comprehensive, for example coupler height is not mentioned. A few years ago they suggested establishing comprehensive standards, but ran into the "we want no ***** standards" attitude, especially from people on the ON30 conspiracy Yahoo group. Many of these are kitbahers, scratchbuilders and freelancers who insist on their right to do their own thing.  Some of them were into ON30 before Bachmann came along, they modified HO equipment. This is why HO standards for couplers etc are often used.

I think the issue is that ON30 modellers are a diverse lot, some modelling 3 foot prototypes, others 30 inch or 2 foot. And there are many freelancers. Mining, logging and industrial themes are popular, as well as common carriers.  One set of standards to suit all of these may not be possible. In fact two sets of de facto standards have emerged. One follows the NMRA published On3 standards apart from gauge which is, of course, HO. The other essentially follows HO standards, except for scale (1:48) and increased clearances. (3" centre to centre for parrallel tracks is often recommended ) Both approaches are prototypical, depending on the prototype. As Bachmann was the first large scale manufacturer into the field most other manufacturers have followed Bachmann's approach (HO couplers and coupler height etc.)

There are anumber of ON30 module groups on Yahoo Groups - they should indicate what they use.

Hamish

The height and size of the HO couplers used by Bachmann for ON30 are also a close match for the former Victorian Railways (Australia) 30 inch gauge lines - the well known "Puffing Billy" is a preserved eample of one of these.

Hamish

In relation to time I believe that both Seasaltchap and Terry are correct. Before railways time was set locally, nominally each place set the time at noon when the sun was directly overhead, so time would vary. As well clocks were not necessarily accurate (or the timesetters relaible) so further variations would occur. Just one example of how the railroad age really changed the world.

Hamish

Quote from: ebtnut on March 16, 2007, 09:55:44 PM
  Side note--it would be neat if someone (hello, Bachmann) would do the W&W Cooke Moguls. 

I thought the Bachmann Moguls (the ones without the C&S air tank) were close to these locos, especially to the existing W&W #4. The Pensy liveried Bachmann mogul was given the number W&W #4 had while in Pensy livery.

Hamish

Woops - a few typos there. I meant the Lehigh Valley Railroad of course.
(I am Australian and don't know american places that well)

Hamish

The 4-6-0 has not been solved, so that is still the the current locomotive.

My guess in is built by Mason, owned by Leigh Vally Railroad. The following is not an idemtical locomotive, but has the same wheel spacing and is a Mason built 4-6-0 for the ieogh Valley.http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rea_home/lv15p.jpg

If I am right I pass on my turn.

Hamish

I can't name the pictured 4-6-0 but the Tyco/Mantua "Dixie Belle" (not Bella) wasn't  a model of that loco or of a converted 4-8-0 with the front driver removed. It was of a Rogers 4-6-0 with a space between the second and third drivers, but no abnormal gap between the front truck and the first driver. See http://tycotrain.tripod.com/trainsets/id2.html

Hamish

Quote from: mmiller on March 05, 2007, 09:44:06 PM
are you referring to the Southwest Narrow Gauge Yahoo group?

I suspect this is the website ksvilis meant :

http://www.i-sng.com/On3/On3_Locomotives/Die_cast_loco/die_cast_loco.html

See bottom of the page.

I have seen these locos mentioned on other sites as well.

Personally I am not interested in either of these and hope that Bachmann does not duplicate them.

Apart from a Heisler a three truck Shay in the 55-60 ton range, an A class Climax or a Maine 2-6-2 are my suggestions for Bachmann. A small 2-4-0 tender loco, which could probably be based on the Porter as prototype locos were as small as 7 tons, could also be a nice addition.

Hamish

.

Hamish