Date   

Re: car builders cyclopedia

spsalso
 

I removed (apparently not quickly enough) my original comment (quoted below) as when I re-opened the DVD, it revealed quite nice scans. I will note that I also ordered a Brooks Locomotive catalog, and the first time I opened it, the scan presentation was equally terrible; but I just re-opened it and it was quite nice.

I DO NOT understand why these items presented poorly on the first viewing but presented nicely on subsequent viewing.

Assuming they keep opening to the latter standards, my complaint is now withdrawn. And I figure on purchasing more of their product.

As a very minor comment, I noted that the Brooks Catalog was from the University of California library. When I first arrived there to go to school, I checked out a whole pile of railroad books (the alternative would have been to study). I held that very copy in my hands approximately 50 years ago. It's quite a thrill to "hold it in my hands" again.


Ed

Edward Sutorik

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Ed Sutorik wrote:
I have just received my copy of the 1946 Cyclopeia plus a couple
other items I ordered. The scan quality is terrible at 75 DPI. I
cannot recommend this company's products. [vintage reproductions]
Thanks, Ed. Good to have the feedback.

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: Flat car project

Tim O'Connor
 

I just noticed another 50 foot flat car with 14-stake pockets
that might be a good candidate for Chad Boas:

ERIE 7300-7424 narrow deck
ERIE 7450-7499 wide deck

I have mediocre scans of 7421, 7470 but they appear the same except
for the deck widths. And the stake pockets resemble the pockets made
by Tichy for their flat car, which I think you can buy separately.

Tim O'Connor


Re: Big Glaring Freight Car Hole

Armand Premo
 

While I have a few of each, I am still looking for a greater variety.There are many cars of all types available but many of them have cast on detail.This includes hoppers too if I can avoid incurring the wrath of some list members.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: jerryglow@comcast.net
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 1:07 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Big Glaring Freight Car Hole



Don't Speedwitch and Sunshine make enough for you? You could always pay in advance and HOPE Smokey Mountain does an auto verstion of the turtle roof car they've promised but is still not out. I requested my $$ back after too long a wait and no progress developing it.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "armprem2" <armprem2@...> wrote:
>
> I would like to see more and better 40' Auto Box Cars.Armand Premo


ADMIN: Underframe modeling

mike brock <brockm@...>
 

Well...we seem to have spent quite a bit of time discussing what parts of the underframe of a frt car [ in particular, those with "deep" side frames ] should be modeled and what parts don't need to be modeled [ in general, those that can't be seen at trackside ]. There also seems to be some kind of concern that if enough knowledgeable modelers believe that if hidden details are not needed they don't need to be provided by manufacturers.

And, of course, some members cannot resist the temptation to take a cheap shot at those whom they disagree with. At first, I thought this thread should be terminated before serious bloodshed occurs...and I will if escalation happens. So, if you want to continue this thread, step carefully.

Sometimes I have had a desire to model an entire car. Hence, I then apply all the details I can to the underbody. In the case of the SC&F Harriman baggage car [ a ftr car by management decree...uh...by me ], this can amount to quite a bit of stuff...including some unusual diamond shape strengthening structures. Did I do the same on other cars in the class? Nope. If you view such a car from 90� to the side at a point about 3 feet high you can't see them. Then there's the case of a UP light weight diner [ no...I have not ruled this to be a frt car ] which I maybe scratch built [ using commercial parts from several sources ]. In this case, I chose to model the interior. OK, completing that, I decided to populate it with people. Oooops. The car, operating on the City of Los Angeles would roll over Sherman Hill in mid morning...10:25 AM to 10:54 AM., 1953, in the area I model. Given that, I figure breakfast service is likely over and so, placed only a conductor and waiter in the car.

Anyhow, the point is, it's up to modeler to decide...hopefully without bashing those that disagree.

Now...does anyone know of a good model of an Evans auto loader? I want to put one in one of my auto cars...complete with auto, of course, and I'll naturally run the car with its doors closed...I mean...surely they wouldn't leave the doors open...would they?

Mike Brock
With head judge robes half on


Re: Big Glaring Freight Car Hole

jerryglow2
 

Don't Speedwitch and Sunshine make enough for you? You could always pay in advance and HOPE Smokey Mountain does an auto verstion of the turtle roof car they've promised but is still not out. I requested my $$ back after too long a wait and no progress developing it.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "armprem2" <armprem2@...> wrote:

I would like to see more and better 40' Auto Box Cars.Armand Premo


Re: Flat car underbody question

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

John Hagen wrote:
Just like a philandering husband, some guys want their Kate and Edith too.

Thanks, John. Best interjection in some time. I'm still puzzling out the freight car content, though. <g>

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: Big Glaring Freight Car Hole (offset quad hopper)

tyesac@...
 

I'd like to see a state of the art four bay offset side quad hopper. With either optional full taper or chisel side taper sides,
Something along the level of detail that the I/M 70 covered hopper or the recent Kadee or P2K cars have.

I know that only a few were owned by Western roads (my intererst) but the Eastern coal haulers had thousands of these.

Tom Casey


I would like to see more and better 40' Auto Box Cars.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hendrickson
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Big Glaring Freight Car Hole

On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Bill Welch wrote:

I realize we all have opinions about the obvious holes in the types
of freight cars yet to be offered in kit form, but in my own opinion,
and as the new MDT book will help underscore and document the
numerous possibilities, the largest class of Wood Sheathed MDT
reefers built with DS ends and fishbelly u/f begs to be offered.
Maybe there are some resinators lurking that will do this, although I
think it is the kind of thing that could be justified in styrene too.
Agreed. I could certainly use one.

Richard Hendrickson








-----Original Message-----
From: armprem2 <armprem2@surfglobal.net>
To: STMFC <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Dec 6, 2011 10:01 am
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Big Glaring Freight Car Hole




I would like to see more and better 40' Auto Box Cars.Armand Premo
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hendrickson
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Big Glaring Freight Car Hole

On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Bill Welch wrote:

I realize we all have opinions about the obvious holes in the types
of freight cars yet to be offered in kit form, but in my own opinion,
and as the new MDT book will help underscore and document the
numerous possibilities, the largest class of Wood Sheathed MDT
reefers built with DS ends and fishbelly u/f begs to be offered.
Maybe there are some resinators lurking that will do this, although I
think it is the kind of thing that could be justified in styrene too.
Agreed. I could certainly use one.

Richard Hendrickson

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









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


Re: Flat car underbody question

Armand Premo
 

My gripe is that you have to deal with the implied and cast on detail.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim O'Connor
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 11:31 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Flat car underbody question




I know Walt, I agree with you. I know that's what Richard means,
although his statement was more broadly expressed. This is a very
old argument. I'm not in the same league as Jack Spencer or Ted
Culotta, but those guys like to model the WHOLE car (at least the
exterior parts) and so do I. I understand the "Hollywood" approach
too -- in the movie business, stuff that is not seen is simply not
there. (Several people at Naperville have drawn this analogy before,
I didn't make it up!)

This same issue has come up many times before with respect to the
interiors of hopper cars and gondolas. How detailed should they be?
There are many examples of every approach -- no detail at all,
some detail, lots of detail. Obviously, no real consensus there,
except that maybe it's easier to remove detail, than to add it.

Tim O'

>Tim,
>
>While standing and operating the typical height layout, no, but the center sill, brake rods, tank, and cylinders can be seen when viewed from track level. That's the angle from which we usually photograph our models, from the point of view of a scale person standing at trackside. In that case, things like the trainline, some brake piping, and the minor crossbearers are NOT visible and I'd say that these are the parts that Richard refers to, not the entire underbody.
>
>Walt


Re: Flat car underbody question

John H <sprinthag@...>
 

I see no reason to remove detail that is already there. If some prefer to add more weight it is simple enough to cut out the cross beams.

If the model had been originally made without the parts in question, there would have been a hue and cry raised about the lack of detail. Just like a philandering husband, some guys want their Kate and Edith too.

John Hagen

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Walter" <mcindoefalls@...> wrote:

Tim,

While standing and operating the typical height layout, no, but the center sill, brake rods, tank, and cylinders can be seen when viewed from track level. That's the angle from which we usually photograph our models, from the point of view of a scale person standing at trackside. In that case, things like the trainline, some brake piping, and the minor crossbearers are NOT visible and I'd say that these are the parts that Richard refers to, not the entire underbody.

Walt


Re: Flat car underbody question

Tim O'Connor
 

I know Walt, I agree with you. I know that's what Richard means,
although his statement was more broadly expressed. This is a very
old argument. I'm not in the same league as Jack Spencer or Ted
Culotta, but those guys like to model the WHOLE car (at least the
exterior parts) and so do I. I understand the "Hollywood" approach
too -- in the movie business, stuff that is not seen is simply not
there. (Several people at Naperville have drawn this analogy before,
I didn't make it up!)

This same issue has come up many times before with respect to the
interiors of hopper cars and gondolas. How detailed should they be?
There are many examples of every approach -- no detail at all,
some detail, lots of detail. Obviously, no real consensus there,
except that maybe it's easier to remove detail, than to add it.

Tim O'

Tim,

While standing and operating the typical height layout, no, but the center sill, brake rods, tank, and cylinders can be seen when viewed from track level. That's the angle from which we usually photograph our models, from the point of view of a scale person standing at trackside. In that case, things like the trainline, some brake piping, and the minor crossbearers are NOT visible and I'd say that these are the parts that Richard refers to, not the entire underbody.

Walt


Re: New MDT book

Tim O'Connor
 

I got mine last night, and read the first two chapters (up to 1877).
Fascinating stuff, well written and fun to read. It's amazing how these
early business corporations came into being and were constantly morphing
and combining/separating. It must be very hard to try and model that
era (19th century), just from the point of view of how many companies
there were and their complex relationships, to say nothing of equipment.

Tim O'Connor

Mine came today and I sat down with some Chai tea to thumb thru it. It certainly meets my modeling needs as well as giving me information about the scope of MDT's business. With the perspective of my own immersion into the FGE/WFE/BRE/NX System, I am really struck by how different the five large refrigerator car entities were, given that their basic business was the same.

One detail that struck me was that the little Tennessee Central, which was deep in the heart of FGE territory had a contract for service from MDT in the 1930s. It also confirmed to me that many of the northeastern RRs not served by FGE were indeed served by MDT.

Well done Roger!
Bill Welch

I highly recommend the new MDT book for your resource library.
It is filled with photos, plans, and charts the serious modeler
will find hard to put down. Kudos to Roger Hinman for putting this great volume together.
Fred Freitas


Re: Flat car underbody question

mcindoefalls
 

Tim,

While standing and operating the typical height layout, no, but the center sill, brake rods, tank, and cylinders can be seen when viewed from track level. That's the angle from which we usually photograph our models, from the point of view of a scale person standing at trackside. In that case, things like the trainline, some brake piping, and the minor crossbearers are NOT visible and I'd say that these are the parts that Richard refers to, not the entire underbody.

Walt

Walt

Can you see the center sill of a box car when it is on your track?
I've seen a lot of layouts, and I'm safe saying that on 95% of the
layouts, it cannot be seen by an adult standing at trackside.

There is such a thing as the logical implication of a statement.

If for example, I say that I am flying to Cocoa Beach, you probably
would conclude that I am traveling on an airplane and have not grown
a pair of wings. You draw such an inference without a second thought.
Why do you suddenly develop an inability to make an inference about
the phrase "invisible when the car is on the track"?

Tim O'Connor



At 12/5/2011 01:00 PM Monday, you wrote:
Richard said, "In my opinion, it is pointless to model underframe details which are invisible when the car is on the track. . . ," NOT "it is pointless to model ANY underframe details." Certainly his statement does not say, "leave it all off, including the center sill."

Walt Lankenau


Re: Flat car underbody question

Tim O'Connor
 

I don't know Schuyler. I find your post rather annoying and silly.
But then I have so few of your posts saved, since I can't recall the
last time you said anything interesting.

Tim, your straw man, as Tony termed it, is silly, pointless and annoying.
Is there a single thing in your note below that is relevant to Steam Era
Freight Cars?

Schuyler


Re: Big Glaring Freight Car Hole

Armand Premo
 

I would like to see more and better 40' Auto Box Cars.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hendrickson
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Big Glaring Freight Car Hole



On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Bill Welch wrote:

> I realize we all have opinions about the obvious holes in the types
> of freight cars yet to be offered in kit form, but in my own opinion,
> and as the new MDT book will help underscore and document the
> numerous possibilities, the largest class of Wood Sheathed MDT
> reefers built with DS ends and fishbelly u/f begs to be offered.
> Maybe there are some resinators lurking that will do this, although I
> think it is the kind of thing that could be justified in styrene too.
>
Agreed. I could certainly use one.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: car builders cyclopedia

Don Strack
 

I should add that I use Acrobat Standard to open and read PDF files.
In both parts of the 1946 CBC, Acrobat asked if I wanted it to
"repair" the PDF file, and when I closed each file, it asked if I
wanted to save the changes, which I assume are the repairs that were
made. When I re-opened the files, they both opened much quicker.

I mentioned before that the book is not in color. I was wrong; there
are several full color ads bound into the book.

I am currently researching the changeover from wooden to steel
passenger cars in the 1910 to 1930 era, along with the adoption of
axle generators to replace early head-end power plants installed in
baggage cars, along with the changeover from heavyweight passenger
cars to lightweight passenger cars. This digital version of the 1946
CBC fills a very nice place in my reference library.

Don Strack

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:54 AM, Don Strack <donstrack@gmail.com> wrote:
I received my copy two days ago. It arrived on two separate DVDs, Part I and
Part II, with about 3.8GB on each disk. The PDF is in color, although the
book itself is not, and the resolution very nice. Part I is 654 pages, and
Part II is 706 pages.

At the same time, I ordered several early CBCs and early locomotive
reference books. They are typical Google Books resolution.

Don Strack
http://utahrails.net/


Re: car builders cyclopedia

Don Strack
 

I received my copy two days ago. It arrived on two separate DVDs, Part I
and Part II, with about 3.8GB on each disk. The PDF is in color, although
the book itself is not, and the resolution very nice. Part I is 654 pages,
and Part II is 706 pages.

At the same time, I ordered several early CBCs and early locomotive
reference books. They are typical Google Books resolution.

Don Strack
http://utahrails.net/


Re: car builders cyclopedia

Mark Stamm
 

I have to agree with Larry I got mine last week and on my 24" LCD display
the images are sharp and you can take the images to at least 400% before
you see any distortion. Great investment wish I had known about them before.



Mark Stamm
PRRT&HS # 8462



mark@euphoriatt.com



From: mt19a [mailto:LarrynLynnHanlon@cs.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 1:56 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: car builders cyclopedia






Guys,

There is no such problem on my copy. There is plenty of detail; you can zoom
in until you see the halftone screen in the photos on the original pages,
and the line drawings are more than sufficiently sharp.

Perhaps a monitor setup issue?

Larry Hanlon.
Bend, OR

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , Anthony
Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Ed Sutorik wrote:
I have just received my copy of the 1946 Cyclopeia plus a couple
other items I ordered. The scan quality is terrible at 75 DPI. I
cannot recommend this company's products. [vintage reproductions]
Thanks, Ed. Good to have the feedback.

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: car builders cyclopedia

mt19a <LarrynLynnHanlon@...>
 

Guys,

There is no such problem on my copy. There is plenty of detail; you can zoom in until you see the halftone screen in the photos on the original pages, and the line drawings are more than sufficiently sharp.

Perhaps a monitor setup issue?

Larry Hanlon.
Bend, OR

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Ed Sutorik wrote:
I have just received my copy of the 1946 Cyclopeia plus a couple
other items I ordered. The scan quality is terrible at 75 DPI. I
cannot recommend this company's products. [vintage reproductions]
Thanks, Ed. Good to have the feedback.

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: Grandt Line, was More useful Precision Scale Parts

Dennis Storzek
 

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

WHAT!?!?!



Merde!



Schuyler



It's just a shame that Grandt no longer makes any of theirs in brass.

Dennis
What is your question?

Dennis


Re: Flat car underbody question

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Tim, your straw man, as Tony termed it, is silly, pointless and annoying.
Is there a single thing in your note below that is relevant to Steam Era
Freight Cars?



Schuyler



From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
O'Connor
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 2:06 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Flat car underbody question





Walt

Can you see the center sill of a box car when it is on your track?
I've seen a lot of layouts, and I'm safe saying that on 95% of the
layouts, it cannot be seen by an adult standing at trackside.

There is such a thing as the logical implication of a statement.

If for example, I say that I am flying to Cocoa Beach, you probably
would conclude that I am traveling on an airplane and have not grown
a pair of wings. You draw such an inference without a second thought.
Why do you suddenly develop an inability to make an inference about
the phrase "invisible when the car is on the track"?

Tim O'Connor

At 12/5/2011 01:00 PM Monday, you wrote:
Richard said, "In my opinion, it is pointless to model underframe details
which are invisible when the car is on the track. . . ," NOT "it is
pointless to model ANY underframe details." Certainly his statement does not
say, "leave it all off, including the center sill."

Walt Lankenau







=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.21, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.18830)
http://www.pctools.com <http://www.pctools.com/?cclick=EmailFooterClean_51>
=======





=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.21, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.18830)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======

81241 - 81260 of 186156