Just a shot in the dark, but I would think the vent cars were dual service and in the early years cheaper to build than a reefer with it's insulation. Thus the vents/boxcars saved money over building more reefers than necessary for traffic that required reefers.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In STMFC@..., "lnbill" <fgexbill@...> wrote:
I will take a stab at this although I have not hard evidence. I can think of two reasons at least.
1. The several railroads in the southeast already owned their vents. This of course is obvious and of course they were dual service, so no compelling reason to get rid of them until they were worn out.
2. The RR's received the money for handling the items that did not need FGE's "Protective Service" which meant the RR's got some income. The shipper would have probably gotten a better rate too.
I am traveling and do not have ORERs with me, but I do remember that the number of Vents began to drop after WWII, meaning FGE would have probably taken up the slack.
--- In STMFC@..., "rwilson1056" <rwilson1056@> wrote:
Been wondering why SAL & ACL would not have utilized FGE reefer in vent service. Wouldn't it have been easier to use the reefers as vents since watermelons moved late spring early summer when the citrus rush wasn't on? would have made both rr's vents expendable.
considering modeling SAL's Tallahassee Sub late spring 1951...