Re: Dry Flow Tank Cars ?


Dave Parker
 

Garth:

I probably should not have used the word "classified".  I only meant to point out some of the cars under discussion appear in my 1936 tariff book, along with more conventional tank cars.  It could well be a billing thing; after all, tank-car rates were based on volume, not weight, and perhaps that was the case with these dry-flow cars.

In my 1935 ORER, I do see some of these classified as LT, but not any as LO.  But only the latter shows up in my 1931 Cyc, illustrating why I get frustrated trying to sort out the ARA/AAR car classifications.  Too much of a moving target, especially in the good old days.

What I was really suggesting is that somebody take a peek at the 1955 tariff to see if these cars are still listed there.  If so, then some better clarity may be obtained than that offered by the ORERs, especially with regard to numbers in service.  If not, well, it was worth a look. 

Best,

Dave Parker




On Monday, January 29, 2018 12:37 PM, "Garth Groff or Sally Sanford sarahsan@... [STMFC]" wrote:


 
Dave,

I have no information on how these cars were classified in the early days, but LT and LTA are in my 1958 ORER as 'Class "L", Special Car Type'. Interestingly, this section includes "LO", covered hoppers, which were hardly special by 1958.

Or do you mean for billing purposes they were treated as tank cars, and we're comparing apples to oranges here?

I'm curious to know how many of these cars existed in earlier days. Clearly by the late 1950s there were just a handful, and the case of the empty numbers of the GATX cars, and the missing American Cyanamid cars, shows that some had already disappeared. I suspect that by the end of our period, LT and LTA cars were wearing out or becoming obsolete, and were replaced by LO covered hoppers.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

    
On 1/29/18 1:46 PM, Dave Parker spottab@... [STMFC] wrote:

 
Because these were classified as tank cars (or so it seems), more detailed information may be found in the tariff books that Ian Cranstone has reproduced and published.  These provide a car-by-car listing, along with tank and dome volumes and (sometimes) other interesting information.

I see a subset of these cars in my 1936 edition.   For some, but not all, the tank volume is given in cubic feet rather than gallons.  GATX 31096-31099 have a footnote indicating they were for use with "Dry Arsenic" (I have no idea as to what chemical form).  Cars 33021-33026 were apparently general use; the footnote indicates "Dry Flow Automatic".  Car 33049 (1680 cu ft) was designated as a "Wet-Flo tank", which I would guess means it carried some kind of slurry.

I don't have the 1955 tariff, but several folks on this list do.  They should be able to look up the comparable information for that time-frame, which coincides with Jim's original query.

Dave Parker
Riverside, CA



Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.