toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
If you'd like me to send you the Mopac freight car diagram for the Mopac 50' flat cars showing a 2 3/4" deck thickness, I will. I don't have a prototype model to verify, but I would want to believe the Mopac followed their own diagrams for the cars. I can verify with other diagrams of Mopac flat cars to compare how think their decks were if you'd like me to.
Tim O'Connor wrote:
But someone cited a 2 3/4" thick deck on a flat car, so if it was aTim,
"standard" then it wasn't much of a standard if railroads were
allowed not to comply with it. Maybe it was just a recommended
practice, like the NMRA? :-)
I don't know about AAR standards, but 2 ¾" does not seem adequate to me on
(1) Our local volunteer tourist RR has several flatcars and a couple stock
cars and (though I have not put a tape measure to their decks), as I recall,
their deck planks are closer to 3.5" to 4" (after years of wear). I'll be
going up to our rail yard tomorrow to work on a 1917 coach we're restoring.
I'll try to remember to put a tape on one of our flat cars. (2)
Structurally, 2 ¾" does not seem nearly adequate to deal with heavy loads.
The decks must be able to support heavy equipment loads AND put up with
years of wear and tear before being replaced. To do that they need to be
thick and thick enough so that after years of wear there is still enough
structural strength to soldier on.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]