Date   

Re: OMI two dome tank car

Tim O'Connor
 

The photo is credited to Gerritsen, not Marsh.
True, but that doesn't indicate who the photographer was. There's
a photo just below credited to Bob's Photo. As someone who lent a
number of negatives to Bob to make prints, I can tell you that in
the era of this advertisement, Bob barely had a clue where most of the
photos in his inventory had come from.

There would be no particular reason to remove lettering just because
a car was removed from interchange service and "stored".
True, but since I think the photo was most likely taken many years after
the car was listed for NIPX, it seems unlikely that the lettering would
be in such good condition if it was the original lettering.

Tim O'Connor


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Ian Cranstone
 

On 2011-06-24, at 3:34 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

Except that the photograph in the Overland ad is clearly of far more
recent vintage, probably taken in the 1970's or 1980's. (Notice the high
voltage transmission tower in the background.)

I can't find any listing for NIPX in 1972 or 1988 or any other source,
except for your 1932 entry. http://www.nakina.net/other/report/reportn.html

General American does list some 10,000 gallon two-compartment tank cars in
the 1950's, and I have a photo of GATX 1018. But that car is not insulated,
has radial rivets, and was clearly converted from a single dome car.

The photo of NIPX #8 is a real mystery. I thought it might be NIRX or NIBX
but those letters don't make any sense either.
Actually, Tim raises some interesting points here, and so I dug into this a little bit further:

A closer examination of the photo shows what look to my eye like AB brake components, which almost certainly were not installed on a car built in 1930 (as I recall, AB brakes were required on new cars beginning in the fall of 1933. I'm guessing (without much other evidence) that this photo more likely dates to the 1950s.

Also, I pulled my June 1936 copy of Tank Car Capacities off the shelf, and lo and behold, there was a listing for NIPX 6 through 8, all two-compartment tank cars. What is interesting is that the ORER had stopped listing these cars by 1933, strongly suggesting that these cars were in captive service (today for example, most coal gondolas are not listed in the ORERs).

So much for my theory that these cars had been transferred to a large leasing company...

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
lamontc@...
http://freightcars.nakina.net
http://siberians.nakina.net


Re: OMI two dome tank car

spsalso
 

Tim,

The photo is credited to Gerritsen, not Marsh.

Also, there would be no particular reason to remove lettering just because a car was removed from interchange service and "stored". I don't think, anyway. Now perhaps there's something about the lettering that indicates a recent date or the like; I can't see it well enough to tell.




Ed

Edward Sutorik


ACL Phosphate car

rdietrichson
 

Hey all,
I'm trying to locate a picture of the referenced car from a CBCyc or an in service phot, that would hopefully show the discharge hopper details. I have the Ambroid plan and a photo of the finished Ambroid model, but have yet to find one of the real thing.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Rick Dietrichson
Wilmington, NC


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Tim O'Connor
 

Yeah? Find me a photo of a 1930's tower that looks like that one.
(The single pole tower seen to the left of the tank.)

There are still 1930's eras towers in my town, so I think I know
what they look like.

Also, Tom Marsh often took photos of cars in the area around
Indiana where he was based - In many cases Tom got field
measurements of cars in order to produce the models, and since
the model is clearly based on this car, I think that's exactly
what he did.

The car may indeed be on the property of the utility. I have
seen many such in-plant freight cars. But that one appears to
have AAR interchange-compliant stencils. Hence, the mystery.

Tim O'Connor

At 6/24/2011 03:45 PM Friday, you wrote:
Huh Tim?

Electrical high voltage towers existed in 1930. In fact, the
Northern Indiana Public Service Company (now known as NIPSCO) was
founded by the merger of Calumet Electric Company, whose 1912 date of
incorporation is usually given as the inception of NIPSCO and
Northern Indiana Gas under the umbrella of the Midland Utilities
Company, managed by Samuel Insull.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


Re: Pennsy Round-roof design issue

Tim O'Connor
 

Tony Thompson wrote

> On the SP, the clearance restrictions were NOT on mainline routes
> but in certain industrial areas.

That should be obvious to anyone who has ever seen a photo of an
SP mainline locomotive like the Mt- mountains or Gs- northerns! When
SP 4449 toured the country it was photographed with the Reading 4-8-4
and the height difference was remarkable!

I suspect the deeper reason the SP didn't buy 10'6" 40 foot XM's was
that the extra room was simply not needed in the pre-palletized cargo
era for such cars. But for specialized cars like auto and lumber box
cars, SP was buying thousands of 10'6" 50 foot cars the whole time it
was buying the lower height 40 foot cars.

Tim O'Connor


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Bruce Smith
 

Huh Tim?

Electrical high voltage towers existed in 1930. In fact, the Northern Indiana Public Service Company (now known as NIPSCO) was founded by the merger of Calumet Electric Company, whose 1912 date of incorporation is usually given as the inception of NIPSCO and Northern Indiana Gas under the umbrella of the Midland Utilities Company, managed by Samuel Insull.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

On Jun 24, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

Ian

Except that the photograph in the Overland ad is clearly of far more
recent vintage, probably taken in the 1970's or 1980's. (Notice the high
voltage transmission tower in the background.)

I can't find any listing for NIPX in 1972 or 1988 or any other source,
except for your 1932 entry. http://www.nakina.net/other/report/ reportn.html

General American does list some 10,000 gallon two-compartment tank cars in
the 1950's, and I have a photo of GATX 1018. But that car is not insulated,
has radial rivets, and was clearly converted from a single dome car.

The photo of NIPX #8 is a real mystery. I thought it might be NIRX or NIBX
but those letters don't make any sense either.

Tim O'Connor

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

No need to speculate as to owner, or car series: NIPX 6-8 were listed in the July 1932 ORER
with a listing modification date of May 1931 (probably their first as neither the reporting
mark or the owner appear in the March 1931 issue) under the name Northern Indiana Public Service Co.
These were the only cars in the listing, with use unspecified. By the July 1933 ORER, they were
no longer listed, most likely meaning that they had been turned over to one of the large
leasing companies (GATX, SHPX, UTLX).

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
www.nakina.net



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

Yahoo! Groups Links



Re: OMI two dome tank car

Tim O'Connor
 

Ian

Except that the photograph in the Overland ad is clearly of far more
recent vintage, probably taken in the 1970's or 1980's. (Notice the high
voltage transmission tower in the background.)

I can't find any listing for NIPX in 1972 or 1988 or any other source,
except for your 1932 entry. http://www.nakina.net/other/report/reportn.html

General American does list some 10,000 gallon two-compartment tank cars in
the 1950's, and I have a photo of GATX 1018. But that car is not insulated,
has radial rivets, and was clearly converted from a single dome car.

The photo of NIPX #8 is a real mystery. I thought it might be NIRX or NIBX
but those letters don't make any sense either.

Tim O'Connor

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

No need to speculate as to owner, or car series: NIPX 6-8 were listed in the July 1932 ORER
with a listing modification date of May 1931 (probably their first as neither the reporting
mark or the owner appear in the March 1931 issue) under the name Northern Indiana Public Service Co.
These were the only cars in the listing, with use unspecified. By the July 1933 ORER, they were
no longer listed, most likely meaning that they had been turned over to one of the large
leasing companies (GATX, SHPX, UTLX).

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
www.nakina.net


new IC reefer decal

jerryglow2
 

At the request of a customer, I've modified my IC reefer set to now also
offer
it for the shop built aluminum #51000. It has numbers and markings
specific to
that car. See:
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/samples/IC_reefer_51000.jpg

I've also "cleaned up" my listing to make it a little more readable and
allowed for separate views of reefers and tank cars.

Please make inquiries OFF LIST

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html
<http://home.comcast.net/%7Ejerryglow/decals.html>


Re: OMI two dome tank car

spsalso
 

Wait a sec. Someone pointed out that the car may have been withdrawn from service (interchange). If that were the case, the car could have sat on a siding somewhere untouched for a very long time. And not have the TILX painted out. And be photographed much later than the early thirtiesl If it went over to GATX, though, I would think it would have had the reporting marks changed. So, then, needle-in-a-haystack time--finding a photo or other info with OMI 3230 in GATX lettering/service.

I've gotta say it's pretty neat how the folks on the list have helped put a story together about this one item. Yes, very nice.


Ed

Edward Sutorik


Re: OMI two dome tank car

spsalso
 

--- In STMFC@..., Ian Cranstone <lamontc@...> wrote:

On 2011-06-24, at 11:03 AM, spsalso wrote:

I wonder if the reporting marks "NIPX" might possibly not be for Northern Indiana Public Utilities. In post-list years, the organization used "NORX", not "NIPX". And in my list-years of ORER, I can't find reference to either Northern Indiana Public Utilities or NIPX. And, although all cars with reporting marks are supposed to be listed, NIPX 8 is not; so an absolute connection between the cited organization and NIPX does not exist in the ORER's that I have.

So, I think I will speculate that "NIPX" is for a different organization--one that would have a likely use for a two dome car like OMI 3230. Since "P" also stands for plastics, I wonder if the car was used for transporting a related chemical. The car was reportedly built in 1930. If so; and if it were purpose built, the list of chemicals would be much shorter than it would be today.

I make the above speculation because I don't see a utility buying a tank car to have transformer oil delivered. Car utilization would be awfully low, I think. Why not have the manufacturer deliver the oil in THEIR tank car--one that would have much higher utilization since the manufacturer would ship an awful lot more oil. And, going the other direction, I'm not coming up with much in the load-out category.
No need to speculate as to owner, or car series: NIPX 6-8 were listed in the July 1932 ORER with a listing modification date of May 1931 (probably their first as neither the reporting mark or the owner appear in the March 1931 issue) under the name Northern Indiana Public Service Co. These were the only cars in the listing, with use unspecified. By the July 1933 ORER, they were no longer listed, most likely meaning that they had been turned over to one of the large leasing companies (GATX, SHPX, UTLX).

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
www.nakina.net

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thank you, Ian, for the info. Speculation withdrawn. Well, that one, anyway. This info sorta implies that the ad photo was taken in the early thirties. The top-activated coupler kinda gets me thinking that, too. I know next to nothing about couplers, so that speculative sentence is pretty, well, speculative.

Interesting.


Ed

Edward Sutorik


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Ian Cranstone
 

On 2011-06-24, at 11:03 AM, spsalso wrote:

I wonder if the reporting marks "NIPX" might possibly not be for Northern Indiana Public Utilities. In post-list years, the organization used "NORX", not "NIPX". And in my list-years of ORER, I can't find reference to either Northern Indiana Public Utilities or NIPX. And, although all cars with reporting marks are supposed to be listed, NIPX 8 is not; so an absolute connection between the cited organization and NIPX does not exist in the ORER's that I have.

So, I think I will speculate that "NIPX" is for a different organization--one that would have a likely use for a two dome car like OMI 3230. Since "P" also stands for plastics, I wonder if the car was used for transporting a related chemical. The car was reportedly built in 1930. If so; and if it were purpose built, the list of chemicals would be much shorter than it would be today.

I make the above speculation because I don't see a utility buying a tank car to have transformer oil delivered. Car utilization would be awfully low, I think. Why not have the manufacturer deliver the oil in THEIR tank car--one that would have much higher utilization since the manufacturer would ship an awful lot more oil. And, going the other direction, I'm not coming up with much in the load-out category.
No need to speculate as to owner, or car series: NIPX 6-8 were listed in the July 1932 ORER with a listing modification date of May 1931 (probably their first as neither the reporting mark or the owner appear in the March 1931 issue) under the name Northern Indiana Public Service Co. These were the only cars in the listing, with use unspecified. By the July 1933 ORER, they were no longer listed, most likely meaning that they had been turned over to one of the large leasing companies (GATX, SHPX, UTLX).

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
www.nakina.net


Re: OMI two dome tank car

spsalso
 

I wonder if the reporting marks "NIPX" might possibly not be for Northern Indiana Public Utilities. In post-list years, the organization used "NORX", not "NIPX". And in my list-years of ORER, I can't find reference to either Northern Indiana Public Utilities or NIPX. And, although all cars with reporting marks are supposed to be listed, NIPX 8 is not; so an absolute connection between the cited organization and NIPX does not exist in the ORER's that I have.

So, I think I will speculate that "NIPX" is for a different organization--one that would have a likely use for a two dome car like OMI 3230. Since "P" also stands for plastics, I wonder if the car was used for transporting a related chemical. The car was reportedly built in 1930. If so; and if it were purpose built, the list of chemicals would be much shorter than it would be today.

I make the above speculation because I don't see a utility buying a tank car to have transformer oil delivered. Car utilization would be awfully low, I think. Why not have the manufacturer deliver the oil in THEIR tank car--one that would have much higher utilization since the manufacturer would ship an awful lot more oil. And, going the other direction, I'm not coming up with much in the load-out category.


Speculatingly,


Ed

Edward Sutorik


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Clark Propst
 

Hey, I've got that box car! I've had it that long? Time flies...Thanks Jeff.
Clark propst

--- In STMFC@..., "Aley, Jeff A" <Jeff.A.Aley@...> wrote:

The magazine back cover in question (and the tank car ad) can be seen at
http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/pages/107/7814/july-1990-page-80 .


Regards,

-Jeff


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Fritz Milhaupt
 

--- In STMFC@..., "brianleppert@..." <brianleppert@...> wrote:
Overland's ad for this tank car included a prototype photo by H. A.
Garritsen of NIPX #8. The ad was on the back cover of a magazine
which I photocopied. Unfortunately, I don't remember which mag, but
was maybe Rail Model Journal. From the mailing label, looks like it
was the February, 1993 issue.

Brian Leppert
Carson City, NV

This car was one of the ones I'd always meant to ask Arnt Gerritsen about, since he did most of the drafting work for Overland Models back then. Sadly, he passed away in March of this year.

-Fritz Milhaupt
Modeling Editor, Pere Marquette Historical Society, Inc.
http://www.pmhistsoc.org


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Aley, Jeff A
 

The magazine back cover in question (and the tank car ad) can be seen at
http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/pages/107/7814/july-1990-page-80 .


Regards,

-Jeff

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of al_brown03
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 8:46 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: OMI two dome tank car



This photo appears on the back covers of Model Railroading and the NMRA
Bulletin, for July 1990. I could convince myself, though the reproduction isn't good, that the reweigh date is either 7/37 or 7/57. The reporting marks NIPX aren't listed in the ORER for either 1/43 or 1/53.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

--- In STMFC@...<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>, "brianleppert@..." <brianleppert@...> wrote:




Overland's ad for this tank car included a prototype photo by H. A. Garritsen of NIPX #8. The ad was on the back cover of a magazine which I photocopied. Unfortunately, I don't remember which mag, but was maybe Rail Model Journal. From the mailing label, looks like it was the February, 1993 issue.

Brian Leppert
Carson City, NV


Re: Pennsy Round-roof design issue

Aley, Jeff A
 

The UP once did something like this. In order to clear a special shipment, the roadbed was lowered as the track passed beneath some obstruction (I believe it was a bridge).

Unfortunately, a section gang, not knowing about the shipment, came through and fixed the "dip in the track" before the special came through. Much hilarity ensued.

Regards,

-Jeff


From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Richard Hendrickson
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 12:10 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Pennsy Round-roof design issue


It
has been said that the Lackawanna, one of the major holdouts because
it claimed it couldn't afford to rebuild its tunnels, fixed the
problem in a weekend by taking out the track and ballast in the
tunnels, bulldozing a foot or so off the tunnel floors, and
replacing the track.


Re: OMI two dome tank car

john.allyn@...
 

The suggestion was made way back in this thread that the car maight have been purchased for off-line storage at the company's facilities.  If so, would it have shown up in the ORER?  Of course, if it was used for off-line storage why go to the expense of repainting and relettering?

John B. Allyn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Thompson" <thompson@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 1:03:05 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: OMI two dome tank car

 




Ed Sutorik wrote:
I have found cars with reporting marks that don't show up in the
ORER before. I suppose that inclusion in the ORER is/was voluntary
and perhaps even involved giving money to the publisher. Maybe
perhaps.
No, it was NOT voluntary. The car descriptions in the ORER had
official tariff status and each issue was intended to be complete and
accurate for use by car clerks. Yes, of course, errors occurred, but
not because it didn't matter. And cars not listed in the ORER were not
supposed to be in revenue service.
Railroads spent real money collecting information and
organizing it for submission to each ORER issue. They did not pay to
be included. But many copies of each ORER were purchased by railroads
for use by agents and clerks. That's how the ORER made its money.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: OMI two dome tank car

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:35 AM, Larry Sexton wrote:

This discussion caused me to check on one of the recent brass
tankcars I
purchased, an OMI GATX 8,000 gal, 3 dome, insulated tankcar
purportedly
rebuilt in the 1940s. It's a beautiful tankcar and Richard
Hendrickson told
me that it was probably based on a wine tankcar for which he has a
photo.
Not to worry. I know that the Federal government took control of a
number of
wine tankers during WWII for the transportation of industrial
alcohol and a
few other priority liquids in support of the war effort. I don't
recall
which companies received these wine cars, but I seem to remember
that some
went to some of the alcohol manufacturers. I'm just not certain why
one
would use insulated cars for alcohol.
Larry, insulation wasn't necessary for shipments of industrial
alcohol, but what suited the wine cars for this service was that they
were glass lined, which prevented contamination.


Richard Hendrickson


B&O High Car Specials Re: Pennsy Round-roof design issue

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

The publishers of the Official Railway Guide and ORER also published a periodical with clearance diagrams (Railway Line Clearances?) for every rail line in the US. A sample of pages from this publication is in Gregg's Train Shed #26 at reprinted pages 445 and 446 of the 1928 Car Builder's Cyclopedia. It seems to me that the original periodical would be able to answer your question definitively as to which B&O line had the most stringent clearance restrictions.

Steve Lucas.

--- In STMFC@..., "boyds1949" <e27ca@...> wrote:

Regarding Sand Patch Tunnel. A good reason for not finding the "North Portal" may be that the direction is east-west. The east portal required a long walk even if you knew where the access roads were.

With that bit of trivia out of the way, I think the clearance problem was on the St. Louis line between Grafton and Parkersburg. The 1947 B&O Freight Working Book had the High Car Section of train 97 going west from Cumberland via Sand Patch to Pittsburgh and then to Benwood (near Wheeling) and to Newark where it was consolidated with 197 to East St. Louis. In 1951 The High Car Section of 97 operated from Cumberland to Willard (again by way of Sand Patch and Pittsburgh)and then to Newark, Cincinatti and East St. Louis.

John King



--- In STMFC@..., "Schuyler Larrabee" <schuyler.larrabee@> wrote:

Richard Hendrickson notes:

Probably the last holdout was the B&O, which dealt with the
tunnel clearance problems on its mainline Sand Patch grade by running
"high car specials" via a longer alternative route through Pittsburgh.
Not so. The real reason is that, on the Sand Patch grade, the tunnel near
Manila has only one entrance. I know because back in 1981 on the day before
ex C&O 614 was to take a train up that grade I went searching for the
northern entrance and it wasn't there. I have always been puzzled about
that, how trains surmounted that ridge...entering the southern tunnel
portal...which I did find...to later appear much farther north. The B&O was
tricky.

Mike Brock

Oh, Mike, that is SO obvious!! You went looking for the northern
"entrance." For that 614 run, there WAS no northern "entrance." It was an
EXIT!!!



Geez, do we have to explain EVERYthing?

SGL





=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.21, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.17770)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======



96041 - 96060 of 197001