Does anybody know if the John Maxwell plans are available for sale?
Specifically, I an looking for dimensional information on the "tall dome" type of narrow gauge CONOCO tank cars (Tank cars #35 and #36). I have the old NG&SLG article but not a lot of info there about this type of CONOCO tank car.
I have been vexed by the height of the dome on these “tall dome” CONCO tank cars.
I have been analyzing the various photos of. CONOCO # 35 and 36 and the dome “wrapper” seems taller than the 28” shown in Maxwell’s plan. The geometry and perspective analysis makes the dome wrapper just under 36” in height.
Trivia, I know. I am working on a set of drawings for the NG&SL Gazette showing #36 in it’s late 1920’s script lettering and in the 1941 CONOCO livery and want to be as close as reasonably possible.
Just to make things interesting, there were apparently three different script styles used on the various CONOCO tanks cars in the 1920’s. Check out the Dorman photos on the Friends of the C&TS web site.
It serves me right for opening this can of worms.
Thanks again everybody,
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 28, 2018, at 10:50 PM, tonyk375 [via C&Sng Discussion Forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
Most builders who have used them know that Maxwell drawings have to be taken with at least one, and sometimes many more-thousands even, grains of salt. Some of his stuff is drawn from folio sheets, and those can also be notoriously wrong, as you must know. On some his drawings the two side elevations don't match. Stuff like that is not uncommon.
I built a Durango Sand House several years ago, and found that the best information I was able to use from his drawings was actually his footprint field measurements. Unfortunately his roof profile looked like something from Dr Seuss (I'm not kidding!) So, using Blazek's drawings with Maxwell's field measurements my project turned out well. Be careful with Blazek's drawings, because he doesn't usually actually measure things.
Scratchbuilding can be a real headache, but if you gather up everything you can find, and study everything, you can usually find a way to get it done by choosing what you think is best from whatever you can find. So don't ignore Maxwell as a source, just be aware that there could be some , uh, surprises in the weeds.
I find the best thing to do is use both the Maxwell and Blazek drawings, and create a physical new drawing, which I often do in 3d, combined by reviewing the available photos. this creates the best balance. if the real thing is available to measure that is an additional bonus.
Maxwell freely admitted he was terrible draftsman, so his drawings don't always make sense. I have found however, that the vast majority of the time he calls out a measurement, it is accurate, usually because he put a tape on it. Drawings I've done based on his measurements and photos, usually turn out well.