Theoretical Question: Replacing Trucks.

[TheR62Fan]

So after my U33C adventure I went on to think about doing some more GE U-boats and dash 7s, since I had added some to my collection. I was thinking on doing a Penn Central U33B, since the differences are not too great, except for one big issue, the trucks. For some reason DTG chose the only Blomberg variants of both 4-axle U-Boats, the U30 and U36, but I guess they make sense fitting within their contexts. However, this is where I had a small epiphany, could one deactivate the bogies, then create a new one (for example, an AAR-B) as a child object? Furthermore, would it actually work?

[buzz456]

How are you going to 'deactivate' the existing ones to begin with? It has been largely accepted that you can't do that but always ready to listen.

[Railfan722]

As I understand it, it's the other way around in a sense. You'd have to create the trucks as a base, then add the entire U33C minus trucks as a child object and presumably steal the blueprint from the original loco for the truck base. I have no clue if it would actually work, but that's the only real way I can think of that preserves the rotation properties of wheels and trucks in TS. Buzz, in order to remove parts of a loco, you'd need a lua script. Parts of the model are grouped into nodes in the 3D modelling program, and with some lua tricks you can tell the game not to display certain nodes. What nodes a model gives you is always a bit of a crapshoot, but you will always have nodes for each wheel/axle and truck on the model, plus the main body. Some models are more forgiving than others; on the Racetrack cab cars, for example, most of the parts can be gotten rid of individually, down to the fluting on the sides. I looked into turning one into a Budd/Pullman-Standard car a while back, but the main body is just too different. It's arguably easier just to start from scratch.

[TheTeenageFoamer]

I don't know know the entire process, but long story short, yes it is possible. Quite difficult from my understanding, but very possible.

[buzz456]

Has it been done by anyone?

[Railfan722]

Has it been done by anyone?

Couple of people have, yes. The TruRail GP9 for example has new Blombergs modeled, and our friends across the pond have done it a few times for various enhancement packs.

[buzz456]

Has it been done by anyone?

Couple of people have, yes. The TruRail GP9 for example has new Blombergs modeled, and our friends across the pond have done it a few times for various enhancement packs.

I may be wrong but I think TR just changed the artwork in the bogie file.

[Fireexplorer249]

Has it been done by anyone?

Couple of people have, yes. The TruRail GP9 for example has new Blombergs modeled, and our friends across the pond have done it a few times for various enhancement packs.

I may be wrong but I think TR just changed the artwork in the bogie file.

We swapped out the trucks. We’ve done it on multiple occasions.

[buzz456]

Has it been done by anyone?

Couple of people have, yes. The TruRail GP9 for example has new Blombergs modeled, and our friends across the pond have done it a few times for various enhancement packs.

I may be wrong but I think TR just changed the artwork in the bogie file.

We swapped out the trucks. We’ve done it on multiple occasions.

Would you care to share?

[Railfan722]

Most direct example I can think of is the Vulcan Productions class 86 pack, which has the older style trucks the class wore in the 1960s.
Original:

VP version:

Note the missing side dampening springs in the VP version. If you want a better shot of the GP9 Blombergs, there's one on the TRS site:

And compare to the original RSC defaults:

Note that the detail has actually been modelled on with theirs, as opposed to the RSC approach of phototexturing them. Okay for 2009, maybe, but with today's standards it just doesn't hold up.

[philmoberg]

Just saw this, but have been wondering about it for a while. If it is possible to add child objects to bogies, then it ought to be possible to set up the whole sideframe as a child object. Of course, this would only apply to new-build models, and would be limited toa given whedlbase and diameter .... unless somebody is really good at creative scripting. It was the options available on the S160 that got me thinking in this direction.

Id be interested to hear what those of you with more experience think.of this.

[TruRailSimulations]

The trucks we put on the SP GP9 was a full on model swap. We did this for multiple reasons:
1. The locomotive body was too high off the ground.
2. The original truck model really wasn't that great.
3. We had more control over how the texturing was done.

In order to pull this off (how we did it anyway), we exported the trucks as if we were building a locomotive (bo01, bo01wh01, etc). We then turned the body into a child object and scripted off what was necessary. We then brought back the animations such as the wipers via script. Then we made custom bogie blueprints and plugged them in to the original locomotive blueprint. It's truly a complicated process. Surely there's a better way of doing it now, we just thought this was easiest at the time.

TL:DR; it's a long process that requires knowledge of lua.

[TheR62Fan]

Well then, I'm glad to hear my dream is not necessarily an impossible one, just one that takes a lot of time and hard work.

[philmoberg]

The trucks we put on the SP GP9 was a full on model swap....

If I understand this accurately, then the process would be simpler if the model's only problem was that it sat too high on the trucks, and minimal-to-no animation were involved. Or am I missing something?

[cnwfan]

I was thinking on doing a Penn Central U33B, since the differences are not too great, except for one big issue, the trucks.

If you're starting with the Seaboard U36B as a base, you're pretty close with the exception of the trucks. As I recall, there were minor exterior differences between a U33 and a U36. Maybe TruRail's trick would work for a truck swap. Otherwise, I think if you start off with the U36C, the model is going to be too long (67' for a U33C and 60' for a U33B). Plus the truck wheelbase on the 4 axle AAR B is shorter than the 6 axle GSC truck.

I have thought about your idea for freight cars, especially steam and transition era boxcars where truck wheelbases were more common as were car wheelbases. The "core" model would be wheels set a specified distance apart, along with couplers. The modeler would then add child objects for the truck sideframes and bolsters, along with a body core. Ends, roof, doors, underbody, brake parts would all be child objects. The idea would be to "kitbash" a car with a set of designated parts. The only real drawback to this method, besides getting the child object coordinates correct in the bin file, is consistent texturing and weathering across the model... just because it is made up of so many different parts.