The Decapod arrived safe and sound:
Here is a size comparison with the Allegheny, the Consolidation and the GP-7 diesel. As you can see, the decapod is only a little bigger than the Consolidation. The tender, however, is enormous. Holy crap. I had a choice of short or long tender, and went with long since they were the same size; I had no idea it was going to be
that big. I think it's the same tender the 2-10-4 PRR loco would have had, and it's actually bigger than the locomotive, or the tender for the monster. This isn't really a problem, just a surprise.
This locomotive has "blind" drivers on the 3rd driving axle - they don't have flanges in order to increase curve tolerance. This was a feature on real locomotives with long wheelbases, although I don't know for sure if this particular locomotive had blind drivers, or if it did, which axle(s) had them. Nevertheless, that explains the ability to take 18" radius curves. They may be hard to see in this image though.
So.. the first running indicates (once again) that this entire layout basically needs to be rebuilt. This locomotive is very finely made, and has small flanges and a long wheelbase. While it can tolerate 18" radius curves, sudden changes in grade up and down and places where one rail is not exactly level with the other are very hard for it to negotiate - as in, nearly impossible. It simply needs better track laying.
Part of the problem is my crappy track laying, but part of it is the difficulty of making a layout this complex fit in a 5'x9' area. As I've said before, it's
really tight. It needs to be spread out considerably. I am not sure if I will enlarge this track plan or do something entirely new when we move, but what I won't do is repeat something with an 18" minimum radius interspersed with 22". 24" is pretty much bare minimum for the main line run on anything new I build. Ideally, at least 27", maybe even 30" for long passenger cars. Just the ability to not have transitions farther apart should smooth things out immensely.