Hi, Can you tell me if the above will run around an 18"curve, please.

            Regards Dave.

If we are lucky, someone who owns these engines will chime in and offer some help.

I can find listings for three different NWSL 2-6-6-2 logging locomotives, and there may have been others.

The Kosmos #11 engine is a stretched-out lanky-looking beast with a long cylindrical tender -- it looks like it might have enough spacing between the front and rear engines to make it around 18" unless there are appliances on the side that would short against the swinging engines.

The Booth-Kelly 2-6-6-2T is a very compact locomotive and a view of the underside suggests that 24" radius might be a challenge. There isn't a lot of room for the articulated front engine to swing.

Could not find good photos of the underside of the popular Rayonier 2-6-6-2 but it could be a possibility.

If you have the 2-6-6-2 in your possession, you can tack down some flex track to a 17.5" radius, apply some power, and see how it does.

I searched for the photos on Google using "NWSL logging 2-6-6-2."

If you have access to Model Railroader's All-Time Digital Archive, you can search '60s and '70s MR issues for reviews. In the Model Train Magazine Index, I tried "NWSL 2-6-6-2 + Rayonier + Kosmos+ Booth Kelly" in various arrangements and got zip, but product reviews are not well indexed.

Josef Brugger

MRH QAT Chief Gopher

Hi, Can you tell me if the above will run around an 18"curve, please.

I think the short answer is yes, but it will look toylike and you won't be able to couple to anything without a lot of manual coaxing. A radius of 24" will look a lot better, and 30" should give you unassisted coupling.

To determine this, I used the above photo and my curve radius guidelines from MRH issue 1. The loco total wheelbase is 5.5" and the total end-to-end coupler distance is about 7". I just went with 6" as a rough average (since the loco wheelbase is hinged, but the boiler is about 6" and rigid) and using the curve guidelines in MRH issue 1, we get ...

15" radius (2.5x) ... will probably track okay, but will look awful

18" radius (3.0x) ... should track fine, but will look toylike

21" radius (3.5x) ... will look better on inside curves

24" radius (4.0x) ... will look better on outside curves

30" radius (5.0x) ... can couple unassisted

This is a "quick and dirty" approximation, the definitive answer will be to test the loco on various curves, but this guideline should get you close.

I have both the tender version and saddle tank version of the NWSL loggers. and the Toby versions also. They will " negotiate " tight radius, but I set a minimum of 24" after watching the operation of them for hours. I guess the question is if you are just locked into a small radius because of layout size limitations ?

Michael

I have a Toby version and I am interested in its minimum radius capability due to the limited width of my central peninsula. Otherwise it will become a display loco as soon as I drag it out of storage.

Meanwhile I was cruising thru some old CD disc of mine and found this photo of that loco Joe pictured above,..

I found my very engine....

And I put it on an 18" radius track and it appeared to work. I didn't run it but a couple of times as it sounded as though it needed a good lubrication, and I didn't want to screw up any old dry gears (been in storage for a number of years)