Changing The Size of General Goods

Feedback, questions, updates on current projects, you name it!
Col Hogan
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:15 am
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Changing The Size of General Goods

Postby Col Hogan » Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:54 pm

I've been wondering this dilemma for a while - the general goods that we see on the SG flatcars and boxes looks fine and I believe they are an Auran product. However, there is a huuuge disparity in the size it NEEDS to be if we are running 36ng or 24ng routes.

Rick, thegrindre, had posted a thread not long ago about the size of it poking through the top of a 36ng boxcar. Definitely too big.

My challenge to anyone who can do it would be to 'downsize' the general goods boxes and make them compatible for the narrow gauge fans.
I have already done some work to have the Camp Goods available as a siding product and is from Slugsmasher and Ben Neal. But no ordinary boxes to fit the smaller gauges.

Anybody interested ??

Ken

BTW - Camp Goods siding is here -

Image

Pencil
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:28 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby Pencil » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:21 am

I made a new set of general goods a while back for this very reason - look for 124060:10001:2 on the DLS

Col Hogan
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:15 am
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Postby Col Hogan » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:47 am

Thanks a whole bunch Curtis. I actually had them and totally forgot about them. I will use them a lot now.

Ken

Dreadnought1
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:40 pm
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

Postby Dreadnought1 » Sat Oct 06, 2007 2:06 pm

Prowler901 made "General Goods 1" - kuid2:43955:11003:1 - for use in his 3ft NG stock. That's a smaller goods pallet which I find most useful.
There's also an AUS Gen Goods by Natvander - kuid:61119:80000 (inbuilt in '06) - which is also a much more reasonable size than the General Goods. Natvander also created the Fertiliser Bagged product - kuid:61119:80006 (inbuilt in '06) - which is also used in Prowler901's 3ft rollingstock.

While were talking useful products, Prowler901 also produced Gold Medal Flour - kuid2:43955:11001:1 - and Domino Sugar - kuid2:43955:11002:1 -which are also pallet based as is John_SB's Cement Bag Pallet - kuid2:60318:10008:1 and his version of Fertiliser Bagged Pallet -kuid2:60318:10010:2.

All are quite useful as they're a good size especially for NG stuff.

Cheers,
Dreadnought1

Pencil
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:28 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby Pencil » Sat Oct 06, 2007 2:24 pm

Absolutely - there are quite a few alternate goods available. The only reason I made separate ones was to get rid of the pallets. Also, have the ones built into '06 made it onto the DLS? Otherwise, they may be a dead end for those with TC.

Dreadnought1
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:40 pm
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

Postby Dreadnought1 » Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:46 pm

The pallets give a standard size admittedly but aren't always really prototypical. I do particularly like the Old General Goods as kegs and boxes are useable into the '20s & '30s. BTW, most of the built-in '06 stuff isn't on the DLS as I believe there were backward compatability issues. However, John_SBs products can be used by those who still use '04 and they're available on the DLS together with a very good interactive loading dock.

Does anyone know of any good Trainz '06 SG rollingstock which I'd describe as "semi-old" - wood bodied fitted with auto couplers but with the types of products we've been talking about as default? We all know we can add them in as part of an operating session but I've always found that the rollingstock loses the added products capability when they go through a portal or interchange.

Cheers,
Dreadnought1

thegrindre
Posts: 734
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Cotten fields of Mississippi, USA

Postby thegrindre » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:45 am

Personally, I really like Pencil42's Union Pacific (UP) and the Central Pacific (CP) series he did. They all load with sound and look damn good for 'old' stuff, IMO.
Rick
TRS 2004 Deluxe Edition v2.4 Build 2365
Creating in 3D Canvas Pro
Web site = http://allricksstuff.com/

Pencil
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:28 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby Pencil » Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:25 am

They're probably a little too old, as they have link & pin couplers instead of the automagics.

Col Hogan
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:15 am
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Postby Col Hogan » Sun Oct 07, 2007 11:39 am

Don't you change a thing Curtis. Grindre and I like what you did and they look just fine. In fact, if you consider making anything else in the 1880 through 1920 era, please use the link and pin. I am a supporter.

Ken

Dreadnought1
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:40 pm
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

Postby Dreadnought1 » Sun Oct 07, 2007 11:48 am

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the link-and-pin couplers, I just want to have some old-style auto-couplered rollingstock for contrast but most I've seen about is of more recent construction.

There must have been a interim period where the bigger roads had moved to autos while other smaller roads still used L&P. There's a fair bit of L&P rollingstock available in 3ft too.

Cheers,
Dreadnought1

bdaneal
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:04 am
Location: Florida, USA
Contact:

Postby bdaneal » Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:43 pm

There was actually a 5-10 year period when all major railroads were converting. Link & Pins became illegal in interchange service around 1905, so any shortlines that had their cars in interchange service would have converted them to autos. Cars that never left railroad property were exempt until the 1940s. At that point it became illegal for any railroad to use them in revenue service. I believe non-revenue were still exempt.

I've thought of making some turn of the century freight cars a few times. But, I keep starting new engines instead of freight cars.
Cheers,
Ben

Dreadnought1
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:40 pm
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

Postby Dreadnought1 » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:09 pm

Ben,
Many thanks for that. I have to say that the "own-use-only" period was a lot longer than I had expected.

One comment in regard to the link-and-pin couplers (while we're talkin' about 'em) - With Trainz locomotives of the period, it's fairly obvious when the long link over the cow-catcher is not "up" in position when switching or coupled funnel-first to cars. Is there any way that the link can be arranged to raise itself to the correct height when attached to a car? Would something similar to the Trainz UK Bluestar coupling system be possible?

Cheers,
Dreadnought1
"Damn the torpedoes....Ahead!....Full Speed!"
- Adm. David Farragut on 5th August 1864

thegrindre
Posts: 734
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Cotten fields of Mississippi, USA

Postby thegrindre » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:12 pm

Thanks for the info, Ben.
I have most of your stuff so anything you put out Imma gonna grab anyway. Don't forget the old wood burners. They have always been my favorites with the larger stacks and spark arresters... LOL
Rick
TRS 2004 Deluxe Edition v2.4 Build 2365
Creating in 3D Canvas Pro
Web site = http://allricksstuff.com/

Pencil
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:28 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby Pencil » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:41 pm

Also, early knuckle couplers had slots so they were still compatible with link-and-pin couplers.
And yes, we've animated the front coupler bar successfully on some of these locomotives - look at Terry's General for the 1st loco on the DLS to use this.
Here's a pic of an early prototype:
Image

Dreadnought1
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:40 pm
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

Postby Dreadnought1 » Sun Oct 07, 2007 7:07 pm

Ahhh....I've always wondered why some auto-couplers had those slots!

I'll download the General later today and give it a run.

Thanks again!
Cheers,
Dreadnought1
"Damn the torpedoes....Ahead!....Full Speed!"
- Adm. David Farragut on 5th August 1864


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron