1. Messages
  2. [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] Shell tankcar for my Quincy-model-RR

Re: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] Shell tankcar for my Quincy-model-RR

Tim O'Connor
 


I agree with you Bruce that we cannot assume the emblem was added in 6-47 but the practically identical amount
of weathering on the emblem when compared to the reporting marks also makes it impossible to dismiss the idea that
the emblem was added at the time of reweigh. But, modelers are safe to avoid the emblem since many cars without
emblems were around all through the 1950's.

I've attached a shot of a no-emblem car that was still active in the 1970's.

Tim O'Connor


On 1/19/2022 8:02 AM, Bruce Smith wrote:
Fred,
Careful with the assumptions. Since this is a tank car, it may not have been reweighed when the logo was painted onto it. Thus the reweight of 6-47 is not an accurate indication of the date of the paint scheme. It is my belief, based on other photos of tank cars, that tank cars were at least occasionally stenciled with an old reweight date (or even the NEW date) when they were repainted.
Regards,
Bruce Smith
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Fred Jansz <fjansz56@...>
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 6:38 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] Shell tankcar for my Quincy-model-RR
 
CAUTION: Email Originated Outside of Auburn.
Brian, thank you!
That picture of Shell SCCX620 answers several of my questions: builder, 10K Gallon car (Steve was right).
What surprizes me is the service date of 6-47 AND the presence of a Shell logo.
So Tim was right presuming the logo was added before 1950.
It proves there's a prototype for everything; my 1949 picture of 677 with SHELL in text and this 6-47 car with logo.
regards, Fred Jansz

Attachments:



--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts
Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.