Re: AAR stockcar


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
"I don't have my notes at work, and I don't know what it was based on,
but I have long been under the impression (delusion?) that the D&RGW,
GN, and CB&Q all had stock cars that were closely related to the
AAR standard, while I thought that UP cars had diagonals running
the other way... But I could be wrong of course. :-)"

You might want to go back and check your notes. As Richard posted
earlier, the 1951 AAR standard design was based on UP Class S-40-12,
500 cars built in 1950.
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/up/up47417d-ajs.jpg

UP subsequently updated the design with a ZU-eave roof, producing
Class S-40-13, 500 cars built in 1951.
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/up/up48859ajs.jpg

You might be confusing these cars with the earlier Class S-40-10
cars, which did have the diagonals running the other way, or the fact
that the Athearn model's diagonal panel roof is the mirror image of
the prototype. See Metcalfe's Union Pacific Freight Cars 1936-1951,
pages 144-149.

Contrary to what I posted earlier today, the D&RGW cars were not
built to this design. D&RGW 36400-36499, built in 1955, were Pratt
truss double-deck cars.

The GN didn't build any cars to this design, preferring to convert
stock cars from SS and DS boxcars. All of the conversions were Pratt
truss cars.

At first glance, CB&Q 52700-53199, Class SM-19B looks close (Clark
Propst photo from the pay side of the RPI website):
http://railroad.union.rpi.edu/rolling-stock/Stock-cars/CB&Q-52801-
Propst.jpg

However, these cars had an IH of 9 ft 1 in, rectangular panel roofs,
and 5 ft door openings. See Hol Wagner's article in Burlington
Bulletin No. 25.

One last cautionary note - the Hundman drawing in the July 1990 shows
an odd end that doesn't match the 4/5 improved Dreadnaught ends of
the UP cars.


Ben Hom

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