Re: Bridge girder on three PRR FM flat cars
He meant end to end, not side to side 😉 and the load is definitely offset to the near end of each of the end cars. That is for good reason. The location of this load is due to several factors:
1) Most flat cars CANNOT carry their rated load concentrated at the center of their span. Offsetting the load to one end or the other allows a heavier load to be carried. In the PRR fleet, the F22 and F23 were among the only cars that could carry their rated weight in the center of the span of the car.
2) There were limits for the allowed free span between the pivot points. Too long a span would overhang on curves and could exceed line side clearances. Think about 85' passenger cars on 18" HO scale radii 😉
3) There were also limits for the free end length for the same reasons as #2, although that was less likely to be an issue
Removal of the brake wheel was no big deal... done all the time.
While hump yards were at least 25 years old at the time, they were not common. Looking at this load, I see a card on the side of the 3rd flat. While this is most likely a route card, it may also contain the instructions "Do Not Hump". Alternatively, rules are made because of stupid people. At this point in time, that rule may yet to be in effect as everyone looks at this load and KNOWS it should not go over the hump. Give stupid folks a few more years to screw it up and the sign will be required.
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Drew Bunn <drew.r.bunn@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2019 12:24 PM
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Bridge girder on three PRR FM flat cars
Not to sound insulting, Claus - but I think you're seeing things. There is no way that load would remain upright unless it was perfectly centered on those flats. I've unloaded centerbeams, and two forklift operators have to remove the load evenly on both sides or the car will fall over.
On Sat., Dec. 21, 2019, 10:21 Claus Schlund \(HGM\), <claus@...> wrote: