Re: Tank Car Info


armprem
 

Richard and Tony,Thank you for the information.Since the data raising the question initially came directly from actual wheel reports raises the question of accuracy.How could anyone confuse a tank car with a covered hopper?The primary sources are over 50 years old and are still in very good condition.I shall revisit these items to see how closely the "Q " and the "G" seem to be and if they are by the same conductor.Maybe there was a violation of Rule G.Thanks again for all your help.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Hendrickson" <rhendrickson@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Tank Car Info


I just realized that, in my response to Armand, I overlooked PGX 54
and PQX 54. PGX 54 is apparently a recording error; the PGX
reporting marks were not in use in 1950. PQX were the reporting
marks for the Philadelphia Quartz Co., and PQX 54 was one of cars
numbered 47, 49, 50, and 55 which were, like almost all of the
company's 118 tank cars, AAR class TM with 50 tons nominal
capacity. The low numbers and the gaps in the number sequence
suggest that these were older cars, some of which had been wrecked
or retired. They were probably 8,000 gal. cars, though PQX did
have a few 10,000 gal. cars, and were certainly ICC-203s or the
earlier equivalent thereof, i.e. with single frangible disk vents
instead of safety valves, as all PQX cars were used in silicate of
soda service and that 's a non-regulatory commodity.

Richard Hendrickson






------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1951 - Release Date: 2/13/2009 6:51 AM

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