The post may have already been deleted.  Actually, that particular word is not profanity, but it is a vulgarity by most standards.  As noted, there are a few teenagers and a few kids, so it's best not to use a word you wouldn't use in church or in front of your grandmother or your great aunt.  
If you were ever in the service, do not use any word your drill instructor used when agitated.  
Gene

Tom,
The H-5 came with flying pumps, I believe.  It's close enough in dimensions to the H-4/H-6 that the COHS suggested putting the 16V behind it to imitate the H-4/H-6. 
In other words, the H-5 has about the same relation to the H-4/H-6 as the J-2 has with the J-1. 

I'm assuming you mean the PRR K4?  Where is the truck hitting the frame?  Find that spot and put a bit of nail polish at the location and then hit it with Dullcote.
Gene

I'm delighted that Bachmann chose to produce a C&O H-4.  this will give me: H-4, H-5, H-6, & H-8.  While the H-4/6 were nearly identical and very similar to the H-5, as mentioned there are some differences.  The C&O never shopped the H-5 to make it look more C&O like they did the J-2.  They really didn't care for the H-5, probably because it was a nice engine and they didn't like the idea that the Yankee gov'ment could produce a loco that good.  (Now why they like the J-2, I don't know.) 
I will agree with Roger - some smaller locos are needed.  Of course, I'd love a K-3 or an F-19!
Gene

Have you checked Champ?

Athearn sells packs of brake wheels, as does Tichy, and various brass superdetailers.

Gene

Ray,
I think it's important that we guide people who don't know that internet content is protected by copyright law. 
I think it's also important to know that it is legal to copy something without permission, as long as what is copied is done in something like a review.  Ray says that Jim is "...quite a guy."  does not need Ray's permission.  OTOH, I saw a complete definition on Facebook of what a military brat is lifted off of Wikipedia, as well as a commercial brat logo.  Needless to say, I let the concerned parties know. 

Gene

Jeffrey,
I can't dispute the reasons that railroads switched to diesels. (No pun intended.)  They were easier to maintain, they could be operated as a single unit with one crew, they were simpler to operate, and they were more flexible than a steamer.  But It was only until the 1990s that any diesel ever exceeded the power of the most powerful steam locomotives.   I believe that was the SD 80mac.  And that locomotive barely outdid the H-8, the Y6B, the Big Boy and probably the N&W A and a couple others.  The early diesels were also not very reliable,  or so I have been told.  Many trains had one or two more units than necessary to insure they had enough power at the end of the run. 
Of course I've also read that the famous N&W test between steam and diesel was rigged, and had the test been fair, the N&W steam would have won.  However, by that time, it was getting harder and harder to find appliances for steam.  Sort of like today.  Go into Sears and try to buy a typewriter.   
Gene

 

A lady with whom I go to church told me today that her husband's father's brass collection was recently stolen.   Apparently the thief took individual pieces to local pawn shops in the Tidewater, Virginia area .  If you happen to go to a pawn shop in this area in the near future, please check.   Based on the one I saw, the man was a collector, not a railroader.  It was exactly like the day he bought it: unpainted, weight not added, extra screws still in pack, etc.   According to his daughter-in-law, he had multi-railroad locomotives plus brass rolling stock.   Apparently he preferred Sunset.
Thanks,
Gene

I've gotten rather disgusted with the "concrete" paint available from railroad paint companies.  I've found that I can find large cans in the decorator section of Lowe's and Wal-Mart that do a much better job of representing concrete. Rust-0-leum's "Oregano" and " Fossil" and Krylon's "Sand" and "Rock" look more like the concrete I've seen, at far less the cost! 
Gene

No - Realistic Water is poured directly on the surface.  Water Effects goes on the non-stick.  It does look good - but most of it is too transparent - to make the surface coverage I needed, it was too thin.  I get the disturbed effect of the waterfall, but not the white color of disturbed water. 
Gene

In any event, the poured "water" is no more than 1/16th of an inch.  I'll make sure that I cut them low enough that they don't get water in their waders. 
Gene

They are thrown manually.  The clearance is tight or I would have used Caboose throws. 
Gene

Water is already poured.  I'm not a fly fisherman, but I can ask my friend, a classmate from military school who is a fly fisherman - apparently a good one.  Better than as a student - he got me in trouble while reading during study hall our first year.  <g>
Gene

I'm finishing up the scenery for the Mickie's Run section.  It will include two or three fly fishermen from Preiser.  The water is by Woodland Scenics so you can see the "run bed".  You fishermen - should I cut the legs off so they appear to actually be in the water?  Three cut at different heights would suggest differences in depth of the water.  Would the legs be visible under water?
(For those of you not familiar, a run is a Virginia term for a moving body of water smaller than a rvier, as in "Bull Run."  It's a common term in Northern Virginia and in the Shenandoah Valley.
Gene