That's a large gallonage for a 50-ton car, so I'd suspect the lading
was lighter than water; but liquid tar, naphtha, benzene, and xylene
are all flammable liquids.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.



--- In STMFC@..., "allen rueter" <allen_282@...> wrote:

From my summers in the steel mill, I don't remember any steel
production liquid byproducts, just slag, but coke production had a

lot

of byproducts.

Maybe and educated guess can be made, loads weight/12,650 gals, we
could make a guess at the density. Then compare that to
tar/naptha/benzene/xylene/... Some coke plants had a flushing
liquor, but most of that was recycled.

Allen Rueter

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@>
wrote:

On Feb 26, 2009, at 4:26 AM, Ned Carey wrote:

what is the odd device on the end of this tank car?
http://tbn0.google.com/hosted/images/c?q=eb8dfb80ba8b6c72_large

Tim O'Connor

As Frank Fertitta observed, it's some sort of unusually large
cleanout cover with some sort of small crane arrangement to

support

it when unbolted from the tank end. What Carnegie-Illinois

Steel

might have been carrying in the cars that required a cleanout

hole

that large I can't imagine, but it's big enough to admit a

workman.

Frank's wrong in his speculation that the car was a high

pressure

tank car of some sort, however, as it was listed in the ORERs as

AAR

class TM, not TP. CISX 2774 was one of ten cars numbered 2772-

2781

which were of 12,650 gal. capacity, unusually large for that day
(Note that the tank is visibly bigger than that on the 10,000

gal.

GATX car to the left). These ten cars were used to carry a non-
regulatory commodity, as is evident both from the stenciling on

the

tank and the absence of safety valves - they had only frangible

disk

vents. I'd be interested to learn from someone familiar with

the

process of producing steel (Tony?) what that commodity might

have

been. At any rate, They were AC&F Type 21s built in early the

1920s,

and the tank cleanouts were probably added later. The dome

platforms

were homemade and were certainly added later.

Ned then observes:

It confirms what most on this list already know

a.. There was quite a variety of tank cars in size shape a

detail.

b.. Most tank cars were plain black
c.. Three compartment cars are smaller, common models like

athearn

are way to large. Note the three compartment car in the upper

right

of the photo. It is noticeably smaller that nearby cars. I

don't

recall seeing a multi compartment car next to other tank cars

and

the size difference is obvious by comparison. (perhaps also a
converted car as the end domes are smaller than the middle

dome.)

All true. The three compartment car appears to have been a 6,000

gal

single compartment car converted to three compartments. Such
conversions were fairly common (more often, though, on 8,000

gal.

cars), especially on GATX cars. 6 K gal. three compartment cars

are

among the more obvious car types that need to be modeled in HO

scale

(Micro-Trains has recent produced one in N scale). And Ned is,

of

course, right that the old Athearn/AHM models are so grotesquely
oversize that they can't even be used as reasonable stand-ins for

any

prototype cars.

What is the age of the photo?

Ca. 1942. Thee are a couple of GATX cars in the photo with

features

(rod tank tie-downs instead of straps, full-circle dome

handrails,

that weren't adopted earlier than late 1941), and all of the

CISX

tank cars were gone from the ORERs by mid-1943.

a.. I see no radial course cars
b.. I see many cars that appear welded with no obvious rivet

lines

There's one radial-course car way off in the distance, but

certainly

they're largely absent from this photo. On the other hand, none

of

the cars that are close enough for details to be made out appear

to

be welded (and I've done some fiddling in Photoshop to bring up

the

details as much as possible).

Interesting details
a.. The platforms on the full platform cars seem heavy. Maybe

the

platforms onsome of the plastic models aren't so crude after

all.

b.. My perception (Which perhaps comes from the model world)

is

that full platform cars were much more common on insulated

cars.

Yet I see a high percentage on non insulated cars in this photo.

Well, as noted earlier, the platforms on the cars close to the

camera

were homemade, and very crude, additions. Dome platforms

supplied by

the tank car builders were much more delicate.

c.. Seeing a person in close proximity to the manway, I am
surprised how small the manways were. It must have been a

squeeze

to get into a car.

Yup. Fat guys would have had difficulty getting in and - worse-
getting out.

d.. On the first track to the left, take note of the second

car

that has a dome showing. It has a circular grab all the way

around

the dome. I haven't noticed this before and yet it is on at

least a

few cars in the photo.

Standard GATC practice starting ca. 1941 but not generally

adopted by

AC&F, the only other significant tank car mfr. by that date.

Most of

the non-CISX cars I can identify in the photo are GATC built and
probably GATC owned. It appears that CISX had some sort of

leasing/

maintenance arrangement with GATC, because in the 1930s they

leased

cars from Pennsylvania-Conley, a wholly owned GATC subsidiary,

and

that would account for the preponderance of GATC cars in the

photo.

e.. The car to the upper right of the diesel cab has lateral
running boards around the dome. I have seen this before and
probably needs to be modeled more frequently. I can't think of

a

single model available that has this. Would this have been an
option tank car builders offered for standard designs or would

this

have been a trademark of a particular builder or tank car owner?

Tank car builder's may have provided those as an option, though

I

can't recall seeing a builder's photo that shows them. However,
owners often added them on cars in assigned service where

elevated

loading and/or unloading facilities weren't available. At any

rate,

adding them on a model is very simple, if you're modeling a

prototype

that had them.

f.. Perhaps most interesting of all is again the second car

(with a

dome showing, 3rd car if you include the partial car in front)

in

the left most row ahs an odd arrangement of rivet lines. Could

this

be a 5 course car?

Yes, an arrangement unique, AFAIK, to GATC cars built in the

early

war years, perhaps because larger pieces of steel weren't

available.

There was a single bottom sheet, two side sheets, and two top

sheets

with a rivet seam down the center as on three horizontal course

cars.

Some other observations, for what they're worth.

The car whose tank end shows at the bottom of the photo was

either a

Standard Tank Car Co. or Pennsylvania Tank Car Co. product, as
evidenced by the tank band location (PTC tanks were made by STC;

PTC,

whose plant was next door to STC's, made only their own

underframes

and smaller components like ladders and dome walkways). The next

car

in the string at the left of the photo was GATX 18285, a 10K gal.

car

built in 1926-'27.

All in all, as Ned says, a very interesting photo, though it

would be

a mistake to over-generalize from it about tank cars as a whole.

Richard Hendrickson



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