Re: "Different" flat load


rfederle@...
 

Wow...I need to watch where my fingers go on that keyboard.

Sorry about the spelling.

Robert Federle
---- rfederle@... wrote:

Clearances would be the biggest issue. As long as a set uf "Bunk" pivot and the other adjacent "bunk" wouldd slide slightly should negotiate turns OK.

Robert Federle
---- Don Worthy <don_worthy@...> wrote:
Hey, that may not have been that unusual. I have a film clip with a load like that on the Central of Georgia Railway around 1955. The only difference is that the Central's load looks like the poles were de-barked and were creosoted.
One of the fellow model railroaders in Gordon, Ga., has modeled it. Darn thing looks good and goes though 28" curves with no trouble.
 
Thanks for the photo
Don Worthy
Ivey, Ga.

--- On Sun, 9/28/08, devansprr <devans1@...> wrote:

From: devansprr <devans1@...>
Subject: [STMFC] "Different" flat load
To: STMFC@...
Date: Sunday, September 28, 2008, 11:19 AM






While checking out the ice platform at monroe, I decided to browse the
other 400+ railroad pictures. Mostly tunnel construction along the GN
- amazing photos and a gold mine if you were modeling that line in the
late '20's early 30's. Lots of GN head-end power.

Not a lot of freight car pix, but this one caught my eye as something
I have never seen modeled. Everyone seems to be doing naval guns and
big structural steel as multi-car flat loads, but this is different:

http://content. lib.washington. edu/cdm4/ item_viewer. php?CISOROOT= /pickett& CISOPTR=1385& CISOBOX=1& REC=20

Hopefully the link works. If not, the neg number is Pickett 4473.

I wonder if these were for trestle bents?

Dave Evans


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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