I have an Aristocraft RS-3 that we were given a couple years ago. It’s a great loco but it’s 1/29th scale and my layout is 1/24th. I’d like to kitbash it into a narrow gauge loco. I’m wondering if there was ever a prototype that was any where at all similar to the RS-3? I’d prefer to use as much of the existing shell as possible.
I can do a purely fictional loco if necessary but I’d like to make it as plausible as I can.
Any suggestions or comments will be appreciated.
Ray:
Take a look at the current 3’ gauge locomotives being used at Plaster City. They are MLW DL535Es and are frequently seen tied up along the north side of the highway, near the crossing. Here is a link to a couple of pix and some info:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?city=Plaster%20City&country=California,%20USA
These are certainly not RS-3s, but they are fairly modern NG diesel locomotives. You might be able to use your RS-3 as fodder to make a 1:24 scale freelance unit. As a bonus, they actually run in the neighborhood you are modeling!
Hope this helps.
Happy RRing,
Jerry
Those are probably the “closest” to the RS3 in terms of appearance-ish, but they’re also HUGE in comparison to how the RS3 would scale out. In 1:24, they’d be over 5" wide. If you’ve got the February 2008 Garden Railways lying about, take a look at the feature on Dutton Foster’s PD&Q. He’s got an RS-3 that he “upscaled” to 1:22.5, by making a new cab, wider walkways and new handrails. If I had the same loco, that’s the route I’d take with it as well.
Later,
K
For a 5" carbody width, at 1:24 scale, it is 120 inches, or 10 prototype feet.
I just now stuck a scale on one of my Bachmann GE 45 tonners. It is 5 3/4" wide. At 1:20 Scale, that is 117" or just 3" short of 10’. I used the B’mann GE, as I have personally measured several similar prototype GE locomotives (44, 45 ton & variants) at the Pacific Locomotive Association’s Niles Canyon Railway & Museum, and the B’mann model dimensions scale out very well.
I agree that a scale model (or at least near scale model) would be ‘huge,’ but that’s what happens when a modern SG carbody & frame is put on NG trucks. And that arrangement is pretty common among NG railroads that lasted into the diesel age.
Thinking of the pix of Ray’s beautifully detailed mountain railway, I would guess a 5" wide locomotive the length of the RS-3 would have clearance problems galore. Ray would definitely need several carloads of dynamite to modify his gorge area’s geography to accommodate an RS-3 sized locomotive!
I assume something like SPNG #1, AKA Little Giant, would be similar in width.
One more thought: Ray’s RR is 1:24 scale running on 45mm gauge track. That means his rails are 42 prototype inches apart. The SG (56.5") carbody is 10’ wide. This is a track gauge to cab width ratio of 2.12. Keeping that same track gauge to cab width ratio for Ray’s 42" gauge track, the cab would be ~89 prototype inches wide. That scales to ~3.72" at 1:24 scale. What is the width of the RS-3? Maybe it mostly needs to be taller, leaving the width and length alone to create a believable large IC engine.
I just measured several nominally 1:22.5 scale locomotives. They are between 3 1/2" (a tiny 0-4-0) and 4 1/4" (a 2-6-6=2 Mallet), so the 3.72" width at 1:24 scale should be believable.
Happy RRing,
Jerry
Kevin Strong said:
Those are probably the "closest" to the RS3 in terms of appearance-ish, but they're also HUGE in comparison to how the RS3 would scale out. In 1:24, they'd be over 5" wide. If you've got the February 2008 Garden Railways lying about, take a look at the feature on Dutton Foster's PD&Q. He's got an RS-3 that he "upscaled" to 1:22.5, by making a new cab, wider walkways and new handrails. If I had the same loco, that's the route I'd take with it as well.Later,
K
cale
Regarding the loading gauge of narrow gauge equipment, it was early thought that the width of the equipment (regardless of gauge) should be no wider than twice the width, which is why early standard gauge stuff hovered between 8’ and 9’ wide, and early 3’ gauge stuff was around 6’ wide. Fitting passengers into cars that narrow proved to be somewhat problematic at first, resulting in widths on the narrow gauge stuff being widened to around 8’ 4", so they could fit double-wide seats down both sides of the aisle. (c. 1880s) At that point, it was pretty much off to the races in terms of width, and the old “rules” of width to gauge quickly became obsolete. By the 20s and 30s, it was not uncommon to find locomotives that exceeded 10’ wide by a fair margin (famously, the D&RGW’s Ks and the Uintah’s Mallets), though most inside-frame locos stayed under the 9’ mark. The EBT made quite a living re-trucking standard gauge cars (10’ widths) and running them on their 3’ rails, but all of their narrow gauge equipment was less than 9’ wide. (And remains to this day, even with the diesels bought since the line ceased “regular” operations.)
SP’s “Little Giant” measures to around 9’ wide, but the two US Army diesels that served on the D&RGW were wider. Width on diesels was often a factor of how wide the hood had to be to cover the motor, etc., plus a suitable width for walkways on one or both sides. (a guesstimate would be around 18" or so minimum). That’s how I’d approach the RS-3 conversion. The hood is a fixed width, add the appropriate width so a properly-sized person could fit down the sides along the hood and the doors could be opened without hitting the hand rails, and that’s how you’d get to your appropriate width. I’d be willing to bet on the RS-3, that’d give you a width somewhere between 4 and 4.5" (8’ - 9’) which is right in the ballpark of what you’d find on the prototype.
Later,
K
I doubt you’ll find a very close prototype that wouldn’t require a whole new carbody, but if you’re just wanting a NG ‘flavor’, then you might want to have a closer look at the big 75 ton Porter that they have at the Georgetown Loop.
(http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/9/5/2/7952.1224819801.jpg)
(http://passengertrainjournal.com/images/Georgetown_Loop.jpg)
(http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/tr_usg1203.jpg)
Or the 50 ton GEs might be do-able
(http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/4/8/8/4488.1217851195.jpg)
Ray, it’s your RR. There is no reason you couldn’t have asked ALCo to build a one off NG RS-3.
Why not custom crunch a homemade (by your railroad) diesel. Add a bit taller cab possibly with a corrugated iron roof, perhaps and old steam locomotive headlight on top of the hood(s), a string operated bell, slightly wider side platforms and footboards and considerable clutter. Leaving the hoods the same size might make it look like an export conversion and still retain the neat Alco look.
I don’t think there’s any prototype in 3 foot gauge that’ll look very much like the RS-3 anyway. Your best “defense” I think is to be as outrageous as you like. 
I’ll probably just build a bigger cab, widen the walkways, replace the handrails and a few other details, and call it narrow gauge.
You could make an RS- 3CPO and paint it in the standard polished gold?
David Russell said:LOL!
You could make an RS- 3CPO and paint it in the standard polished gold?
This might be a place to look for body ideas http://www.northeast.railfan.net/industrial.html
Look at Australian locomotives - a division of ALCO was/is? active there.
Here’s an example of 6 axle units with bodies just as easily used on 4 axles
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=32470
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61966
The first photograph is a Queensland Railways narrow-gauge diesel (3’ 6"). Second is a standard gauge 48 Class, although this body was also used as a 3’ 6" gauge locomotive in South Australia. Queensland Railways also ran many hooded diesels, similar to the RS-3 basic shape on their narrow-gauge rail.
Since I’ll have to replace the handrails, I’m curious as to what other folks use for handrail material?
Brass
McMaster Carr has a nice selection of brass rods…http://www.mcmaster.com
Or you can get some from Hobbylinc - http://www.hobbylinc.com
