Saw this one on railpictures. It reminds me of the Bachmann HO model. I never seen any photos of this one before. Does anyone know her story?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.p ... 53&nseq=43

She's been on the Cuyahoga Valley. It was never a B&O loco, but worked for the AirForce.

Another case of diesel modeling in 1:1 scale. :-) Sure looks neat, no idea where it is headed.

Rob

My friend Tom Travis, sent me this photo and I checked into it a little bit. The B&O actually did have a couple of GE 44-tonners, both built in 1950 and numbered 19 and 20. So this locomotive was logically given a number just above the highest numbered B&O unit so that no confusion would ensue that she was actually a B&O diesel.

Les

I've never understood the need to give one of these "1 to 1 scale" models a different roadnumber. Only railfans care, to the public the trickery of the effect is the same.

I used to hate what I called diesel facadism, especially when the locos are modified like the "CNJ F3B" thay is a modified B&M F7B.

Now i have come to the thinking that replicating a long gone unit in both detail, paint, and roadnumber is acceptable if it helps the interpretive experience.

Rob

I'll vote for a different number on the reproduction unit, to help with sorting the photos in the future, when the dates and captions are lost.

Agreed - I think it can be a valuable way to accurately depict a time period or a lost locomotive when there are none left. It's a way to preserve a part of history - not the locomotive itself, but the surrounding environment. And having a different road number, as was mentioned earlier, is a good way to tell them apart for the people who care. I can't say this is true in this case, as I don't know enough about this particular locomotive, but as long as nothing historical is destroyed in the process (to the point where it cannot be put back together and refit back to the way it was), I don't mind.