|
Re: Why not model actual train consists? (UNCLASSIFIED)
Armand Premo
Elden,While I have a large number of resin cars I do have a fair share of "Stand Ins".Some of these cars with be super detailed by adding new under frames,ladders,brake gear,grab irons and the like.Some will never make it and will be disposed of through trade meets or out right sale.My roster is constantly being upgraded and in somewhat a state of flux.The refining process is on going..I don't want to leave the impression that.I have the ideal.I hope I never reach that stage.As I learn more and new and better cars become available I will continue to add cars.Many of us,myself included,tend to buy cars for our favorite roads even when prototype information doesn't support it.Try as I might I still buy some cars impulsively.I am constantly working on that problem.Discipline.discipline.Armand Premo
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
From: Gatwood, Elden SAW To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 3:01 PM Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Why not model actual train consists? (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Armand; You may be past this point, but given my lack of actual consists, I had to use photos, limited special reports done on car numbers by location, and industry data, to develop my fleet. I made sure to include enough cars for each industry of service, to not have the same cars show up again and again, unless they were specifically dedicated to that location. Thus, for a service like coal, I have a lot of hoppers I can create blocks from, and get a different group every time, as I do for the many tank cars I need at the coke by-products plants. For Corning Glass, up river, however, they have a small dedicated fleet of covered hoppers, for their glass sand, and you tend to see members of that small group repeatedly, as you would in real life. For my run-throughs, which appear at the back of my layout, and which do not visit the front or even stop, I have a fleet of kits with molded on detail (HORRORS), which while I would love to super-detail, I may not live long enough. Most of these are big strings of loaded hoppers going one way, and MTYs the other. I change out the motive power and cabins on either end, and voila, a "new" train. For my actual set-outs and stuff that gets switched in my face, I have my super-detailed cars, only about 60 so far, which I enjoy seeing close-up in a fully detailed scene. The others are just going in and out of staging, so I don't have much time to focus on them, anyway. The last group are the "special" cars Tony mentioned, that I rotate out on a very infrequent basis, because one would only occasionally see them in real life. They are the depressed center cars with a big transformer or other; long structural loads, etc. They are kept in a drawer and pulled according to my "random chance" generator (2 x 10-sided dice and a table of chance occurrences). This method nicely addresses the randomness of need for a rebuilt transformer at the power plant, and other chance events. Elden Gatwood -----Original Message----- From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Armand Premo Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 1:14 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Why not model actual train consists? Not to belabor this issue,but I just checked a whole month of wheel reports to see what the correlation was with the Twenty Largest railroads.The results were not really earth shattering.However,while some roads were well represented some were not in the top twenty for that moth.Other roads not in the top twenty had many more cars during that month than those on the list.. -If one has a sufficient amount-of data as well as a large-enough roster modeling actual train consist should no be boring.-- I try to remove most of the cars used in an op session and replace them with other cars for the next op session.In betwee I make up the train that will run on the during the next session.Not seeing the same cars over and over will help to make the process less boring.Your comments will be appreciated.Armand PremoOriginal Message ----- From: Jim Betz To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:02 PM Subject: [STMFC] Re: Why not model actual train consists? Hi, The flurry of responses has started to wind down. They are all well thought out and great. Thanks. So here's an update to my suggestion: The major 'flaw' in my suggestion is that if you model specific consists you will end up with ops that are 'boring' (over time) ... unless you have a fleet that is much larger than the normal layout. I agree with this. So what if your -fleet- is modeled based on actual train consists ... but you don't use those consists for your ops - or if you do use them duirng ops you only do so on a few trains or only on "special occasions"? - Jim ---------------------------------------------------------- Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.891 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3235 - Release Date: 11/03/10 04:36:00 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.891 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3235 - Release Date: 11/03/10 04:36:00
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Richard Townsend wrote:
BTW, that 1943 Alcoa ad makes the same point you did regarding thickness: "Aluminum is naturally resistant to corrosion. Its use permits conservative designs, because lightness can be achieved by building with thick sections which give stiffness and sturdiness."A faintly dishonest comment by Alcoa, because while aluminum has about a third the density of steel, it also has about a third the stiffness of steel. Thus to get the stiffness of a given steel structure while making it of aluminum (other things equal), all parts will be three times as thick and the final result will weigh the same as did the steel. The economy comes if there are sections which can be lighter, such as side sheets (if stakes are stiff enough), or if webs of sills can be lighter, etc., and of course with corrosion resistance. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers (UNCLASSIFIED)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Caveats: NONE That's very interesting, and may explain the PRR's big move to corrugated panels (instead) during the early 60's rebuild campaigns for gondolas, but not for hoppers, which instead were getting big rectangular box top chords, pre-made welded side sheet replacement panels, and other alternatives. I haven't seen the correspondence on their thought process on this, however. (I did find it for coil cars) After the brief love affair with lightweight box cars, the PRR did a complete about face, and ordered heavier box cars from the fifties on. One can actually see the bowed "AAR '44" and earlier design cars, in the photos they have showing on-line failure, or documentation for rebuilding campaigns. Instead of messing with side sheets, they went to big, full-length side sill channels, doorway gussets, and other design flaw corrections, but that, as they say, is a different subject... Elden Gatwood
-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Thompson Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 2:46 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: [STMFC] Re: Corroded hoppers Gatwood, Elden wrote: That is about what I expected, since the bulk of PRR correspondence onAs railroads also found with stronger and thinner steel in box cars, this is a structural trap. The weight savings really aren't very big, a few thousand pounds, and the thinner steel is LESS stiff. The elastic modulus of steel, which controls stiffness, doesn't vary with strength of the steel, so thinner material automatically means a loss of stiffness. That in turn makes the structure of the car more flexible, and accentuates any trend to cracking or tearing at critical locations. If you keep the steel sections the same size, stiffness remains constant but of course there's no weight saving any more. The only way to get greater stiffness with thinner sections is innovations like corrugated or Dreadnaught ends instead of flat plate ends, ditto for doors. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com <mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com> Publishers of books on railroad history Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
|
|
Re: Why not model actual train consists? (UNCLASSIFIED)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Caveats: NONE Armand; You may be past this point, but given my lack of actual consists, I had to use photos, limited special reports done on car numbers by location, and industry data, to develop my fleet. I made sure to include enough cars for each industry of service, to not have the same cars show up again and again, unless they were specifically dedicated to that location. Thus, for a service like coal, I have a lot of hoppers I can create blocks from, and get a different group every time, as I do for the many tank cars I need at the coke by-products plants. For Corning Glass, up river, however, they have a small dedicated fleet of covered hoppers, for their glass sand, and you tend to see members of that small group repeatedly, as you would in real life. For my run-throughs, which appear at the back of my layout, and which do not visit the front or even stop, I have a fleet of kits with molded on detail (HORRORS), which while I would love to super-detail, I may not live long enough. Most of these are big strings of loaded hoppers going one way, and MTYs the other. I change out the motive power and cabins on either end, and voila, a "new" train. For my actual set-outs and stuff that gets switched in my face, I have my super-detailed cars, only about 60 so far, which I enjoy seeing close-up in a fully detailed scene. The others are just going in and out of staging, so I don't have much time to focus on them, anyway. The last group are the "special" cars Tony mentioned, that I rotate out on a very infrequent basis, because one would only occasionally see them in real life. They are the depressed center cars with a big transformer or other; long structural loads, etc. They are kept in a drawer and pulled according to my "random chance" generator (2 x 10-sided dice and a table of chance occurrences). This method nicely addresses the randomness of need for a rebuilt transformer at the power plant, and other chance events. Elden Gatwood
-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Armand Premo Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 1:14 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Why not model actual train consists? Not to belabor this issue,but I just checked a whole month of wheel reports to see what the correlation was with the Twenty Largest railroads.The results were not really earth shattering.However,while some roads were well represented some were not in the top twenty for that moth.Other roads not in the top twenty had many more cars during that month than those on the list.. -If one has a sufficient amount-of data as well as a large-enough roster modeling actual train consist should no be boring.-- I try to remove most of the cars used in an op session and replace them with other cars for the next op session.In betwee I make up the train that will run on the during the next session.Not seeing the same cars over and over will help to make the process less boring.Your comments will be appreciated.Armand PremoOriginal Message ----- From: Jim Betz To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:02 PM Subject: [STMFC] Re: Why not model actual train consists? Hi, The flurry of responses has started to wind down. They are all well thought out and great. Thanks. So here's an update to my suggestion: The major 'flaw' in my suggestion is that if you model specific consists you will end up with ops that are 'boring' (over time) ... unless you have a fleet that is much larger than the normal layout. I agree with this. So what if your -fleet- is modeled based on actual train consists ... but you don't use those consists for your ops - or if you do use them duirng ops you only do so on a few trains or only on "special occasions"? - Jim ---------------------------------------------------------- Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.891 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3235 - Release Date: 11/03/10 04:36:00 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers
Richard Townsend
Is it a long report? BTW, that 1943 Alcoa ad makes the same point you did regarding thickness: "Aluminum is naturally resistant to corrosion. Its use permits conservative designs, because lightness can be achieved by building with thick sections which give stiffness and sturdiness."
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Richard Townsend Lincoln City, Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@signaturepress.com> To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, May 25, 2011 11:49 am Subject: [STMFC] Re: Corroded hoppers Richard Townsend wrote: Do you know of any discussion with respect to PRR 740279? This wasAlcoa sponsored several hopper car projects in aluminum in the 1930s. The material was terribly expensive and it's no surprise that nobody built any additional cars (without the Alcoa subsidy) in those days. But AFAIK the cars performed all right. I have an Alcoa report on this which indicates good resistance to corrosion. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Richard Townsend wrote:
Do you know of any discussion with respect to PRR 740279? This was a GLc hopper built or rebuilt with aluminum, in 1932, I think. I don't know if there were others in the same or other PRR series that were aluminum, but I have a 1943 Railway Age ad from Alcoa featuring that car.Alcoa sponsored several hopper car projects in aluminum in the 1930s. The material was terribly expensive and it's no surprise that nobody built any additional cars (without the Alcoa subsidy) in those days. But AFAIK the cars performed all right. I have an Alcoa report on this which indicates good resistance to corrosion. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Gatwood, Elden wrote:
That is about what I expected, since the bulk of PRR correspondence on the topic of failures, at least post-war for sure, is about things they believed were engineering issues, not about materials.As railroads also found with stronger and thinner steel in box cars, this is a structural trap. The weight savings really aren't very big, a few thousand pounds, and the thinner steel is LESS stiff. The elastic modulus of steel, which controls stiffness, doesn't vary with strength of the steel, so thinner material automatically means a loss of stiffness. That in turn makes the structure of the car more flexible, and accentuates any trend to cracking or tearing at critical locations. If you keep the steel sections the same size, stiffness remains constant but of course there's no weight saving any more. The only way to get greater stiffness with thinner sections is innovations like corrugated or Dreadnaught ends instead of flat plate ends, ditto for doors. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers (UNCLASSIFIED)
Richard Townsend
Eldon (or anyone else, really),
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Do you know of any discussion with respect to PRR 740279? This was a GLc hopper built or rebuilt with aluminum, in 1932, I think. I don't know if there were others in the same or other PRR series that were aluminum, but I have a 1943 Railway Age ad from Alcoa featuring that car. Richard Townsend Lincoln City, Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: Gatwood, Elden SAW <elden.j.gatwood@usace.army.mil> To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, May 25, 2011 11:34 am Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Corroded hoppers (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Tony; That is about what I expected, since the bulk of PRR correspondence on the topic of failures, at least post-war for sure, is about things they believed were engineering issues, not about materials. Despite what some believe, the PRR did not believe itself infallible, and was always looking for ways to improve car design...ALL cars. Hence the major X29, X31A, lightweight box car, gondola, and hopper rebuilding campaigns, and the many improvements they made to new design as a result. There is a much later discussion about materials that focused on the use of "new" steel, one being Cor-Ten, but I believe that was because the PRR was looking at a large fleet of old hoppers that had earlier and hence, fairly thick, steel sheet, in both sides and slope sheets, to prevent early (and often) replacement of same due to structural failure (generally bulging, then tearing or separation of sheets at seams). USS was claiming the same tensile strength, for a thinner sheet, which could have saved the PRR a lot, in light weight of each car, and hence, allow greater load weight per car (they were slightly unloading cars, as a corporate goal, to reduce structural failures in their old, old fleet of hoppers, especially when loading ores and stone). But most of the rebuilding campaigns did focus on areas of weakness in the design, not materials, and discussion on corrosion is notably absent. Elden Gatwood -----Original Message----- From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Thompson Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 1:47 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: [STMFC] Re: Corroded hoppers Gatwood, Elden wrote: It would be interesting to know how geographic/regional this issueLooking through railroad industry journals such as Railway Age in the first ten or 15 years of the 20th century will show numerous articles and letters to the editor about corrosion prevention on steel car bodies, which of course were then just coming into common usage. Paint formulas, surface preparation methods, drying times, and other aspects of the problem were repeatedly discussed. After roughly World War I, this topic disappears from the literature, and I assume a consensus had emerged on how best to paint steel cars. This consensus was NOT on account of copper-bearing steel being introduced to combat corrosion, because that happened about a decade later. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com <mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com>; Publishers of books on railroad history Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers (UNCLASSIFIED)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Caveats: NONE Tony; That is about what I expected, since the bulk of PRR correspondence on the topic of failures, at least post-war for sure, is about things they believed were engineering issues, not about materials. Despite what some believe, the PRR did not believe itself infallible, and was always looking for ways to improve car design...ALL cars. Hence the major X29, X31A, lightweight box car, gondola, and hopper rebuilding campaigns, and the many improvements they made to new design as a result. There is a much later discussion about materials that focused on the use of "new" steel, one being Cor-Ten, but I believe that was because the PRR was looking at a large fleet of old hoppers that had earlier and hence, fairly thick, steel sheet, in both sides and slope sheets, to prevent early (and often) replacement of same due to structural failure (generally bulging, then tearing or separation of sheets at seams). USS was claiming the same tensile strength, for a thinner sheet, which could have saved the PRR a lot, in light weight of each car, and hence, allow greater load weight per car (they were slightly unloading cars, as a corporate goal, to reduce structural failures in their old, old fleet of hoppers, especially when loading ores and stone). But most of the rebuilding campaigns did focus on areas of weakness in the design, not materials, and discussion on corrosion is notably absent. Elden Gatwood
-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Thompson Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 1:47 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: [STMFC] Re: Corroded hoppers Gatwood, Elden wrote: It would be interesting to know how geographic/regional this issueLooking through railroad industry journals such as Railway Age in the first ten or 15 years of the 20th century will show numerous articles and letters to the editor about corrosion prevention on steel car bodies, which of course were then just coming into common usage. Paint formulas, surface preparation methods, drying times, and other aspects of the problem were repeatedly discussed. After roughly World War I, this topic disappears from the literature, and I assume a consensus had emerged on how best to paint steel cars. This consensus was NOT on account of copper-bearing steel being introduced to combat corrosion, because that happened about a decade later. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com <mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com> Publishers of books on railroad history Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
|
|
President's announcement NYCSHS-Members group‏
James Yaworsky
As the new president of the New York Central System Historical Society, I am delighted to announce that the Society has established a Yahoo group for the free exchange of NYC-related information between and among Society members. This effort will respond to the very real concern that Society members could not communicate among themselves. If you are a NYCSHS member and want to talk with
other NYCSHS members, get aboard now! NYCSHS members who have Yahoo accounts should log on to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYCSHS-Members/ and request to enter the group. Have your NYCSHS membership number ready and insert it into your request. NYCSHS members who do not have Yahoo accounts should log on to http://groups.yahoo.com/ and then insert "NYCSHS-Members" in the "find a Yahoo group" search box. This will bring up a screen that has the group shown, with a "join this group" clickable hot-link. Not a NYCSHS member and want to get aboard? Please visit the Society's website at www.nycshs.org to obtain a membership application. My thanks go to member Jason Cook for setting up this new discussion group, and to Jim Yaworsky and Noel Widdifield, who will join Jason as group moderators. Richard L. Stoving
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Gatwood, Elden wrote:
It would be interesting to know how geographic/regional this issue was, and how it evolved over time. I recall seeing discussion on effects of corrosion early in the twentieth century . . .Looking through railroad industry journals such as Railway Age in the first ten or 15 years of the 20th century will show numerous articles and letters to the editor about corrosion prevention on steel car bodies, which of course were then just coming into common usage. Paint formulas, surface preparation methods, drying times, and other aspects of the problem were repeatedly discussed. After roughly World War I, this topic disappears from the literature, and I assume a consensus had emerged on how best to paint steel cars. This consensus was NOT on account of copper-bearing steel being introduced to combat corrosion, because that happened about a decade later. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
|
|
Re: Why not model actual train consists?
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Armand Premo wrote:
I try to remove most of the cars used in an op session and replace them with other cars for the next op session. In betwee I make up the train that will run on the during the next session. Not seeing the same cars over and over will help to make the process less boring. Your comments will be appreciated.I agree with this idea, and have done something similar. I am meticulous in replacing in any train a "distinctive" car, such as a depressed-center car with load (or any distinctive open-car load), or something vividly painted, such as a Chateau Martin wine car or a brightly painted tank car, or, say, a helium car (yes, they are indeed appropriate for my layout place and time). I am less energetic in replacing plainer cars, and the plainer they are the less likely to be replaced in a particular re-set, but I have been trying out a system of "wheel reports," in which I use a switchlist form to record train consists and operating dates. Once a small stack of these has been accumulated, I no longer have to rely on memory to realize that the Illinois Central box car, say, has been in that train for some time. Most of my car changes occur with the local which picks up and delivers cars to my branch line junction, since it is driven by waybill sequences. The wheel reports are a way to avoid waybill sequencing for mainline trains but still keep train appearances varied, as Armand correctly says. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroad history
|
|
|
|
Re: Why not model actual train consists?
Armand Premo
Not to belabor this issue,but I just checked a whole month of wheel reports to see what the correlation was with the Twenty Largest railroads.The results were not really earth shattering.However,while some roads were well represented some were not in the top twenty for that moth.Other roads not in the top twenty had many more cars during that month than those on the list..
-If one has a sufficient amount-of data as well as a large-enough roster modeling actual train consist should no be boring.-- I try to remove most of the cars used in an op session and replace them with other cars for the next op session.In betwee I make up the train that will run on the during the next session.Not seeing the same cars over and over will help to make the process less boring.Your comments will be appreciated.Armand PremoOriginal Message ----- From: Jim Betz To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:02 PM Subject: [STMFC] Re: Why not model actual train consists? Hi, The flurry of responses has started to wind down. They are all well thought out and great. Thanks. So here's an update to my suggestion: The major 'flaw' in my suggestion is that if you model specific consists you will end up with ops that are 'boring' (over time) ... unless you have a fleet that is much larger than the normal layout. I agree with this. So what if your -fleet- is modeled based on actual train consists ... but you don't use those consists for your ops - or if you do use them duirng ops you only do so on a few trains or only on "special occasions"? - Jim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.891 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3235 - Release Date: 11/03/10 04:36:00
|
|
|
|
Re: Corroded hoppers (UNCLASSIFIED)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Caveats: NONE It would be interesting to know how geographic/regional this issue was, and how it evolved over time. I recall seeing discussion on effects of corrosion early in the twentieth century, but the issue for my time period (late 20th C) seems to have been overshadowed by the effects of overloading or over-use rather than corrosion-induced failure. Perhaps this was from the use of better steel, or just that corrosion was not that much of an issue relating to the coal found in my area of the country. That being said, I remember seeing corrosion on the slope sheets and lower insides, of many hoppers I personally climbed into, but it never appeared to have been the cause of failure of either, and sorry, I did not take photos of it, either. Elden Gatwood
-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rwitt_2000 Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 4:30 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: [STMFC] Re: Corroded hoppers Richard Townsend wrote: sheets and bottom sheets as a result of hauling (high-sulfur) coal or sulfur. Anybody know of any? Richard, I know of two seminal articles about steel freight used by the B&ORR that have illustrations of corrosion to early open-top cars; hoppers and gondolas used in coal service. The first article discusses B&O gondolas class O-12, O-14, and O-17, and hoppers class N-8, N-9, N-10 and N-10A. It describes and illustrates the types of failures and the "repairs" made to to "fix" the problems. The second articles mostly describes the failures to the B&O class W-1 (similar to the PRR H21) and how these coke hoppers were repaired and rebuilt in 1923. It especially notes that copper bearing steel showed less corrosion. Both articles describe corrosion damage to steel cars that were in service for 7 to 10 years. 1. Maintenance and Repair of Steel Freight Cars, Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, American Engineer and Railroad Journal (became Railway Locomotive & Cars), vol. 81, p. 161, May 1907, (18 page article). 2.Reducing the Corrosion in Steel Cars, Steel containing a small percentage of copper adopted to prevent rapid deterioration, J.J. Tatum, Superintendent Car Department, Baltimore & Ohio, Railway Mechanical Engineer, vol. 97, no. 7, July 1923, pp.413-416. If you have access to a large university engineering library you should be able to locate these two articles. I haven't checked recently, but PDFs of some railroad journals are in Google Books. I would offer to copy these articles for you, but my copies are from 45 years ago when copy machines could not copy half-tone photographs in journals so a second generation copy would be unreadable. I hope this helps. This has been discussed in the past on this list so possibly others have better copies of these articles. Regards, Bob Witt Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE
|
|
|
|
Re: Why not model actual train consists?
al_brown03
This amounts to assuming that the cars in your consists are representative of those in your modelled territory. Given a large enough data sample, that assumption may be good, although some pitfalls have been pointed out in this thread. (Two examples: [1] "Your" conductor may have worked only certain trains; [2] photographs obviously over-represent daytime trains, and may also over-represent trains doing something photogenic, e.g. climbing a grade.) Proceed, but with caution, I'd say.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Jim Betz <jimbetz@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Why not model actual train consists?
Hi,
The flurry of responses has started to wind down. They are all well thought out and great. Thanks. So here's an update to my suggestion: The major 'flaw' in my suggestion is that if you model specific consists you will end up with ops that are 'boring' (over time) ... unless you have a fleet that is much larger than the normal layout. I agree with this. So what if your -fleet- is modeled based on actual train consists ... but you don't use those consists for your ops - or if you do use them duirng ops you only do so on a few trains or only on "special occasions"? - Jim
|
|
|
|
Re: Reading Box Car
rwitt_2000
Al Brown wrote:
bar trucks, and Youngstown replacement door. Looking at the photograph and the drawings again, it appears that this Reading boxcar also has a replacement roof. It looks like a Hutchins. For a kit-bash one could cut one from the Accurail reefer if the width of the cars bodies are similar. Bob Witt
|
|
|
|
Re: Marion, OH RPM
golden1014
Hi Joe,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks about the correction regarding the tower at Marion. I know practically nothing about the Erie Railroad--it is one of those very interesting roads I have always wanted to study, and now I have good reason to. John John Golden O'Fallon, IL
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Joseph Lofland <jjlofland@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Reading Box Car
Dennis Storzek
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Drew <phillydrewcifer@...> wrote:
Al Westerfield did patterns for these years ago. They went to Walker model Service, and thence to On-Trak Models when they bought Walker's line, and recently to Wiseman Model Services when Paul Redmond sold the On-Trak line to Wiseman. The Wiseman site was slow earlier today, but I see it's running now: http://www.locopainter.com/store/product.php?id=424 Dennis
|
|
|
|
Re: Reading Box Car
Ed Walters
I couldn't find it via Google, but it's available at: http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032183216
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Ray Breyer <rtbsvrr69@...> wrote:
al brown wrote:Wow, what a beauty! Check out the fishbellyunderframe, unusualarch bar trucks, and Youngstown replacement door.
|
|
|
