Re: Freight car with ICC report

Aley, Jeff A


You are correct: I was applying the data in the report to the G-N model.

All the report says is that the cars are "away"; it does not indicate where they are. The UP modeler can be assured that between 0 and 57,279 PRR box cars were on the UP at the time of the report.



From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Mike Brock
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 7:21 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Freight car with ICC report

Jeff Aley says:

The report I have (a spreadsheet that I believe is from Tim
Gilbert), shows the following (among other things):

Roadname, # of boxcars, # of boxcars at home, # of boxcars away, % of
national away boxcar fleet.

For example,
UP had 27,553 boxcars. Of these, 7,853 were on the UP and 19,700 were
away [on other RR's]. Of all the "away" cars in the country, this was
OK. So you are saying that 5.02% of the "away" box cars were UP.

Thus, a PRR modeler should have UP as 5.02% of his "foreign" cars (after
accounting for regional bias, etc.).
From what you are saying...and you may have more to add...I don't see why.
We know that the "away" UP box cars are "away". We know how many there are.
Unless the report shows something more, we don't know where they are. They
could all be on the FEC for all the report shows. Did any part of the report
indicate that the away cars had to be distributed on each other RR according
to their % of the national average? I'm not disputing anyone's proposal or
theory...just trying to determine exactly what the report said.

PRR had 78,788 box cars, of which 21,059 were home, and 57,279 were away.
These away cars were 14.59% of the national away fleet.
Noooo problem.

Thus, a UP modeler should have PRR as 14.59% of his "foreign" cars (after
accounting for regional bias, etc.).
Again...why? Couldn't more PRR "away" cars than their % of the national
population be found on the B&O and C&O, thus reducing their numbers on the far as the report says.

Mike Brock

Join to automatically receive all group messages.