----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Hendrickson" <rhendrickson@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Digest Number 789

Dennis Carpenter writes:

Maybe Richard can explain the standard for dome platforms on eight and
ten thousand gal. tank cars back in the twenties. Some had none, some
had one and some had two. The ones with one seem to always have it on
the same side in relation to the relief valves and brake wheel. Was
this just a whim of the manufacturer or buyer? Did the type of service
or contents have a bearing? Would it make a difference who the owner
was? Union Tank Car or Shippers Car Line versus a company with less
than a
hundred cars say, who were doing things on-the-cheap? Were one platform
on each side finally mandated?

I wish I had more information on this subject, and it's one I intend to
research when I have an opportunity. Dennis is right that there was no
consistency. Cars with no dome platforms generally had high running

boards

(e.g., the early UTL Classes V and X). In the tank car manufacturer's
catalogs dating from the in the 'teens and '20s one platform was standard
and the second one optional (though it could hardly have been a very

costly

option), and many cars (e.g. UTL X-3 and X-4 classes) were built with only
one platform, almost invariably on the left side. To complicate matters,
though, many of these got right side platforms added later, though whether
this was mandated by the AAR or ICC I don't know. The practice of

applying

platforms on both sides seems to have largely prevailed from the late

1920s

on (even on UTLX cars), but some tank cars were still being built as late
as 1942 with only one dome platform (e.g. SP O-50-14 class built by GATC).
Anyone else have any insight into this question?

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/