--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote:
[snip] Note, however, that until near the end of
the Pacemaker P/L scheme in the 1960s these cars operated almost
As a CASO NYC modeler, this statement jarred me a little. It was certainly the original intent of the NYC that these cars not go off-line, and the minimal reporting data on the first few paint schemes was designed to discourage interchange. However, the "post-1960" paint scheme (offered by Intermountain) had full reporting marks, and research shows those cars were no longer in restricted service.
To quote from Terry Link's "Canada Southern" website (the NYC master roster, specifically):
"Lot 848-B cars delivered in Pacemaker paint including complete dimensional data in black - these were the only cars built new in the PACEMAKER scheme - delivered in 1954. In September/October 1955, the oval "System" herald had the black background return. Complete dimensional data added to cars that were not fully repainted - usually in white paint."
Basically, the "pacemaker" fast-freight "less than carload" service had been abandoned after a few years, and the cars after September/October 1955 had repaints that definitely released them in to unrestricted service.
The lot 848-B cars of 1954 had apparently never been exclusively in restricted service but as they had 8' doors they are not the model Intermountain is offering.
With the end of the Pacemaker service, high speed trucks were replaced with "normal" freight car trucks, and higher-capacity springs reinstalled on many cars.
Even when the cars lacked full reporting marks, they were apparently constantly drifting off-line.
In short, many of the Intermountain cars would be appropriate for almost any 1950's and especially 1960's layout - especially the model of the most recent of the 4 schemes offered. By putting full reporting marks on the next most recent 1955 scheme, they would probably be more prototypical for "foreign" road use... although apparently even a car still sporting the original 1945/6 scheme could have merely had reporting marks painted on and then been released in to the general freight car pool. For layouts in the 1945-mid 50's time frame, the first two Intermountain schemes would probably be OK "as is".
The only scheme offered by Intermountain that seems to perhaps have a mistake to me is the third, "1955", scheme. It seems from Terry Link's information that any car painted after September/October 1955 would have had full reporting marks. But perhaps not, since it looks like somebody at Intermountain definitely researched these schemes. For example, in the release drawings, only the 1960 renumber scheme shows NYC lot # above the oval (which upon checking out available photos, appears to be correct).