Date   

Re: Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

Mikebrock
 

Tim O'Connor says:

"Mike, it may come as a shock to you, but some people actually have
conductor's books that are not from the Union Pacific in 1949."

Why would I be shocked about that? It is widely known that there are several Fraley books in the hands of members and we even have other UP information that cover 1956. And, there are wheel reports of other rrs as well. However, as the subject shows, this issue is about my Fraley.

Mike


Re: 1944 AAR 10'-6" IH Box Car for Monon

tyesac@...
 

MIke,

Make sure you get the RC car with the correct end for your needs. I think these are the old IMWX cars and came with "square corners" and "W corners", which are the more rounded off corners.

Tom Casey


Thank you, Ed. This gets more and more interesting. Did you see Richard
endrickson's reply? It looks as if Red Caboose has got me covered.
Thanks and best wishes!
Michael
Michael Gross
a Ca�ada, CA 91011-3542

-----Original Message-----
From: michaelegross <michaelEGross@aol.com>
To: STMFC <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 27, 2012 9:28 pm
Subject: Re: [STMFC] 1944 AAR 10'-6" IH Box Car for Monon


Thank you, Ed. This gets more and more interesting. Did you see Richard
endrickson's reply? It looks as if Red Caboose has got me covered.
Thanks and best wishes!
Michael
Michael Gross
a Ca�ada, CA 91011-3542

n Feb 27, 2012, at 7:24 PM, Ed Hawkins wrote:
On Feb 27, 2012, at 5:22 PM, atsfnut wrote:

> I am fairly new to the group and, though primarily a Santa Fe
> modeler, I have an old set of Champ decals with the Monon "Hoosier
> Line" slogan to the right of the door, and would love to paint and
> decal a box car to accept these decals. I note on the O-Scale
> Protocraft website that they offer a set of decals for that Monon car,
> which they say was a 1944 aar 10'-6 " IH box car from
> pullman-standard, lot 5860. I can't quite tell from the Protocraft
> photo on the site what the end configuration of that car might be, but
> it looks to be a 4/4.
>
> The description is at:
> http://protocraft.com/category.cfm?ItemID=305&Categoryid=20
>
> My question: is there a manufactured car out there for that 1944 AAR
> car, or might this entail a difficult kitbash?

Michael,
The cars in question as shown in the Protocraft decal set, CIL 1-500
built ca. June 1947, had 10-panel welded sides, Murphy panel roofs, and
as you stated 4/4 Improved Dreadnaught ends. Interestingly, the
Pullman-Standard lot number list actually specifies the cars as being
PS-1 box cars although they lacked the Pullman proprietary ends and
roofs. Coincident with these Monon box cars, the first PS-1 box cars
having the Pullman ends and roofs began production in June 1947 with
the building of Lehigh Valley 62000-62499.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins





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

------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
Individual Email | Traditional
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



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


Re: A bit of light on wine

Tim O'Connor
 

I think this was true about cigarettes as well -- the tax stamps were put on
at the point of manufacture. When I was a kid growing up in NJ we'd hear stories
about trucks being stopped on the NJ Turnpike with untaxed cigarettes -- these
were sold through Mafia connections in the NYC area for distribution via vending
machines. Evidently it was (and probaby still is) a big business. In the 50's of
course, cigarettes were still shipped in railroad box cars - possibly a bit more
difficult to cheat the taxman that way.

Tim O'Connor


While my experience is out of our time period, I'm sure very little was different in the 50's. I worked for a wine wholesaler in the 70's and we use to receive at least 2 insulated boxcar loads of packaged wine a week from central California.
My company (receiver) was in the south. The taxman was there when the car was loaded and was unconcerned about collecting taxes, it was a done deal.
George Courtney


Re: Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

Tim O'Connor
 

Mike, it may come as a shock to you, but some people actually have
conductor's books that are not from the Union Pacific in 1949. But
I'm glad to see you're taking the proper approach towards verification
of the factual record. After all, we can't be sure the UP ran trains
every day, or even picked up their rail and relaid it again the next
day, without an airtight continuous record of everything!

Tim O'Connor

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

"In fact, since I can show you examples of incorrect
entries -- non-existent reporting marks, non-existent car numbers, I have
no reason to assume that every cargo listing is accurate."


Oh? You have a copy of my book? I would be interested in knowing the errors
you have discovered.
Mike Brock


Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola

Bob McCarthy
 

Paul,

     Could you share an image or two with me off line?

Thanks,

Bob McCarthy

--- On Thu, 3/1/12, Paul Hillman <chris_hillman@msn.com> wrote:

From: Paul Hillman <chris_hillman@msn.com>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 1, 2012, 3:32 AM
















 









Thanks for the kind words.



These cars were built starting around 1906 for the C&WI (I think). At one time they had 600 gondolas on their roster. I don't know when they were finally retired, maybe in the 1970's. They were in use in the 1960's. I saw them personally in the early '60's and they appear in several photos of Dearborn Station and elsewhere in the '60's. So, they fit into the entire STMFC timeline covered.



I'm modeling the Chicago area in 1950, including the C&WI Dearborn Station. For me these cars are a must-have, and I've been wanting to build them for about 50 years. Grew up in Chicago along the C&WI mainline to Dolton, Ill.



The HO model started with a Funaro & Camerlengo resin kit based on a Rutland RR car. Basswood was used for the ends and end-beams, styrene for straps, I-beams and other parts, and Archer rivets.



The basic car is very light. I cast low-temp, car-weighting material, metal bars, and glued them between the 2 frame center-beams. I made a wooden form to the dimensions of between the center-beams, cut the low-temp into pieces, then melted it with a soldering iron to melt and flow-into the wood-form. It still needs some more weight but there's not much room except at the 4 underframe corners, without terribly mutating the underbody appearance.



On another list, one member said that the (probably) last remaining C&WI survivor of this car, at the Illinois RR Museum, which was is poor shape, had finally fallen apart during a recent severe wind storm. If I were a rich man, I would offer to buy the remaining car and all of it's metal parts, and rebuild it. All it would take is a bunch of wood and work, and maybe would be easier than building this model under a microscope. (Magnifiers for all us old geezers???)



Paul Hillman



----- Original Message -----

From: wheelknocker<mailto:steamers01@sbcglobal.net>

To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com<mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 6:06 PM

Subject: [STMFC] Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola



Paul,

Very nice work! What time-frame does this car fit into? I assume the model is HO? Is the model made from Basswood, brass or styrene or all? Did you add any weight to enhance the cars tracking?

Sorry for so many questions, when I see such an obviously well done model, I like to pick up any pointers I can.



Regards,

Greg Rich































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


Re: Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

Mikebrock
 

Tim O'Connor writes:

Subject: Re: [STMFC] Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

"Since these documents were unofficial, I see no reason to assume they
are 100% accurate."

Since the subject references my message about information from my UP Frt
Conductor book...UP form 2639...I can say that I have no idea if the
contents of the frt cars listed are correct. Nor do I know for certain that
UP actually ran frt trains in Wyoming in 1949...since I was not in Wyoming
to verify that in '49. I would also say that it is likewise possible that
conductor Fraley chose the area of his operation [ Laramie/Rawlins ] because
he thought that Rawlins was the end of the earth and if he traveled further
west he would fall off. He might also believe that certain Indian tribes in
Wyoming were still at war with the U.S. Or...he may have thought dinosaurs
still roamed the area west of Rawlins. We'll never know. OTOH, we DO know
that the purpose of the frt conductor book was to record certain info about
the trains Fraley rode. Examining the book I have only been able to find a
couple of possible known errors. I certainly cannot prove the accuracy of
the information...nor do I believe it necessary. It IS a valuable source of info...and, like most sources...vulnerable to error and the viewer should understand that and use the info with that in mind. OTOh, as Mark Amfahr notes, few known errors from Fraley's books stand out.

"In fact, since I can show you examples of incorrect
entries -- non-existent reporting marks, non-existent car numbers, I have
no reason to assume that every cargo listing is accurate."

Oh? You have a copy of my book? I would be interested in knowing the errors
you have discovered.

Mike Brock


Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola

Paul Hillman
 

Thanks for the kind words.

These cars were built starting around 1906 for the C&WI (I think). At one time they had 600 gondolas on their roster. I don't know when they were finally retired, maybe in the 1970's. They were in use in the 1960's. I saw them personally in the early '60's and they appear in several photos of Dearborn Station and elsewhere in the '60's. So, they fit into the entire STMFC timeline covered.

I'm modeling the Chicago area in 1950, including the C&WI Dearborn Station. For me these cars are a must-have, and I've been wanting to build them for about 50 years. Grew up in Chicago along the C&WI mainline to Dolton, Ill.

The HO model started with a Funaro & Camerlengo resin kit based on a Rutland RR car. Basswood was used for the ends and end-beams, styrene for straps, I-beams and other parts, and Archer rivets.

The basic car is very light. I cast low-temp, car-weighting material, metal bars, and glued them between the 2 frame center-beams. I made a wooden form to the dimensions of between the center-beams, cut the low-temp into pieces, then melted it with a soldering iron to melt and flow-into the wood-form. It still needs some more weight but there's not much room except at the 4 underframe corners, without terribly mutating the underbody appearance.

On another list, one member said that the (probably) last remaining C&WI survivor of this car, at the Illinois RR Museum, which was is poor shape, had finally fallen apart during a recent severe wind storm. If I were a rich man, I would offer to buy the remaining car and all of it's metal parts, and rebuild it. All it would take is a bunch of wood and work, and maybe would be easier than building this model under a microscope. (Magnifiers for all us old geezers???)

Paul Hillman

----- Original Message -----
From: wheelknocker<mailto:steamers01@sbcglobal.net>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com<mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 6:06 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola





Paul,
Very nice work! What time-frame does this car fit into? I assume the model is HO? Is the model made from Basswood, brass or styrene or all? Did you add any weight to enhance the cars tracking?
Sorry for so many questions, when I see such an obviously well done model, I like to pick up any pointers I can.

Regards,
Greg Rich


Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola

Greg Rich
 

Paul,
Very nice work! What time-frame does this car fit into? I assume the model is HO? Is the model made from Basswood, brass or styrene or all? Did you add any weight to enhance the cars tracking?
Sorry for so many questions, when I see such an obviously well done model, I like to pick up any pointers I can.

Regards,
Greg Rich


B&O M-27b boxcar update, was: Odd roof

Jim Mischke
 

Additional research in B&O memos and photos develops some clarifications on the clarifications.

1. The roof stiffeners on the Tatum XLT roofs of classes M-27b (double door) and M-27f (single door) were very late additions to older cars. The stiffeners were indeed NOT part of the Evans Auto Loader racks, although they may coincide with strong points there. As Tim O'Connor mentioned, most photos do not show any such stiffeners. I do have some such photos, turns out all are very late in their service lives.

2. The first group of 200 M-27b converted to M-27f, by welding the left door shut, occurred in 1939. I had said no M-27f conversions existed in 1940. Nonetheless, these first M-27f were destined for grainloading service, so would not be seen in the 1940 GM film on YouTube. The M-27f conversions also involved some additional light doorway hardware, to accept temporary grain doors.

3. More information: The type "C" Evans Auto Loaders in the M-27b were removed, ordered by B&O memo dated 3/42. I would assume the auto boxcar fleet was heavily impacted by the cessation of civilian automobile production in 1942. The removed Evans Auto Loader equipment was set aside, not to be immediately released and scrapped.

4. In a parallel thread, I had said that the M-27b was the preferred B&O automobile boxcar between 1935 and 1947. The sample car 295000 was modified with the Tatum roof in 8/33, the rest came on board in 1936. I had forgotten about the WWII suspension of civilian automobiles, so there is a huge gap in their auto service 1942-45. It is not clear if Evans Auto Loaders were ever reinstalled in class M-27b after the war. The memo trail is silent on any reinstallation.

5. More information: Then-B&O subsidiary Alton was assigned ten M-27b boxcars, returned to B&O in 1942. They may have carried C&A reporting marks and paint, the B&O memo implies but does not expressly say that. Both the auto market disruption and the looming Alton bond default would influence this return.

I hope these revised points are informative.

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


Some clarifications:


Mansard roof is a Sunshine sales flyer fiction. Let's call it the Tatum XLT roof. What B&O called it.

There were no single door class M-27f in 1940. This would be the predecessor M-27b autoloading double-door boxcar that the single door M-27f were converted to about 1947.

The roof stiffeners were part of the design. This is where some of the Evans autoloading ramp hardware was anchored.




--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, timboconnor@ wrote:


Definitely a "mansard roof" like the M-27f. But I never saw one with stiffeners before.

Tim O'

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Burn" <burn@>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 12:08:51 PM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Odd roof

The roof looks like it a B&O M27f see
http://www.steamerafreightcars.com/modeling/models/harr/bo382281main.html
for a model.

Don Burn


-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Arved
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 12:03 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Odd roof

Given the context of this 1937 film, my bet is these cars are automobile
cars, but the roofs show at 11:15 in the film are unlike anything I've ever
seen:

http://youtu.be/oMv5imaTdcA

If anyone recognizes the cars, I'd appreciate the education.

The film also has some great footage of automobile cars being loaded, among
other things.

Thank you,

Arved G. Grass
Fleming Island, Florida



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

Yahoo! Groups Links





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

Yahoo! Groups Links





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


Re: Caboose trucks GN

Dennis Storzek
 

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

The transoms on GN's cabooses are kind of crude looking, IMO, and GN was using freight car truck side frames instead of special ones as on the Bettendorf trucks. Perhaps Great Northern fabricated these trucks themselves? AFAIK, these are unique to GN.

Brian Leppert
Tahoe Model Works
Carson City, NV
Tyrone and I had discussed these in person a while back, and I postulated that these were an early version of the Bettendorf cast transom, meant to fit a standard sideframe, but I could never find anything to substantiate this.

A question that comes to my mind is what holds these trucks together? For that matter, what holds a Barber-Bettendorf truck together?

The earlier iterations of this design, using wood transoms and arch bar sideframes, just had the transoms bolted directly to the side frame. This essentially locked all four wheels into a non equalized rigid frame, much like a one piece molded model truck. However, I'm sure the wood transoms were limber enough that they just twisted sufficiently to allow all four wheels to remain in contact with uneven track. Even the later swing motion archbar trucks that used steel channel section transoms were likely somewhat flexible, since the transoms were not unified into a box shaped fabrication with cover plates. The Bettendorf cast transoms are a box section, and are not likely to twist to allow the sideframes to equalize. That means that there must be some allowance for motion between the sideframe and the end of the transom casting, and indeed, they do obviously appear to be separate pieces with some clearance between. But, what held them together? It isn't very obvious from the drawings, and I've never had the opportunity to dismantle a prototype truck of this sort.

Dennis


Re: Caboose trucks GN

John H <sprinthag@...>
 

Brian,

Great info there. I've always wondered how those trucks actually worked. I knew how they looked from the side and obvisouly they had to function but that was as far as my knowledge went. One of those things I was going to research when I got a "round tuit" but just never did. Thanks to you I now understand the design.

Thank you,

John Hagen

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



This is in response to Tyrone Johnsen's post from eight days ago:

These are Swing-Motion Caboose trucks. Swing-motion trucks differ from conventional trucks in that the truck bolster and spring plank never touch the side frames. Rather, a Transom connects the two side frames. The transom is open in the center from the top thru the bottom. The spring plank hangs from the transom by four links. The springs sit on the spring plank and the truck bolster sits on the springs.

I have added three illustrations from a Bettendorf Co. brochure to the "GN Caboose Trucks" file on the Photos section. These show Bettendorf's Swing-Motion Caboose Truck, their cast Transom and a cross section view which I hope will better explain how these trucks are set up.

Notice that the center line of the leaf springs are inboard of the side frames. This is why less of the leaf springs are visible from trackside.

The transoms on GN's cabooses are kind of crude looking, IMO, and GN was using freight car truck side frames instead of special ones as on the Bettendorf trucks. Perhaps Great Northern fabricated these trucks themselves? AFAIK, these are unique to GN.

Brian Leppert
Tahoe Model Works
Carson City, NV

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "aaejj2j" <tyrone.johnsen@> wrote:




I have posted four prototype photos and one model photo of an Andrews truck as used on the shorter GN cabooses in the Photos section in a new file called GN Caboose Trucks. Of interest here is the spring chamber area. I am interested in information or thoughts on the approach the GN used on these caboose trucks. The GN had similar caboose trucks with "Bettendorf" T-section and perhaps U-section sideframes which utilized the same or nearly the same spring chamber. About up to 1940 the GN cabooses generally used archbar trucks but these 25' wood cabooses were upgraded about in the 1940s and received new trucks, generally Andrews and Bettendorf T-section sideframes. The 1945 and later 30' cabooses like the Ambroid, Northeastern, and PFM Tenshodo models had U-section sideframes with similar spring chambers. I wonder if this approach was unique to the GN or if others had similar trucks. The trucks have a 5-0 or so wheel base and probably came off older freight cars which might have gotten newer trucks of higher load capability. The spring chamber appears to have been flame cut (on the ends) out of a box section of steel. The bolster is seen farther inward.
I photographed this on a car on private property in MT along US 2 and the old GN tracks; but from photos I have seen it is representative. Some older photos may show a sheet metal over the area above the springs. Note I added a plastic foot long ruler to help me determine various lengths.
Of course what I have been trying to do is improve the trucks on my cabooses as I do not like the brass trucks for operation and no plastic framed trucks look correct. Most model trucks are longer wheelbased and if they have real springs their spring chamber seems unrealistically wide. Trucks such as CV or Kadee are often modified with the old Walthers, Silver Streak, Kemtron (I think I have all of these) metal springs result in the springs protruding too far outward, visible bolster end, and too wide a spring opening and without the appropriate enclosure. I have modified some model trucks as IM. I have many more photos and some with dimensions added and some of various model trucks and conversions for those who may be willing or interested.
Thank you,
Tyrone Johnsen
Rockford, IL


Re: Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

Tim O'Connor
 

Of course not. It's just a conjecture, a free-associative inference.
I want to see contemporaneous testimony! The standards of truth
must not be compromised! Vague recollections need not apply!

Tim O'

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Thompson" <thompson@signaturepress.com>

Do you now accept that possibly waybills were the basis
for the cargo listings in time books?

Tony Thompson


Re: Caboose trucks GN

brianleppert@att.net
 

This is in response to Tyrone Johnsen's post from eight days ago:

These are Swing-Motion Caboose trucks. Swing-motion trucks differ from conventional trucks in that the truck bolster and spring plank never touch the side frames. Rather, a Transom connects the two side frames. The transom is open in the center from the top thru the bottom. The spring plank hangs from the transom by four links. The springs sit on the spring plank and the truck bolster sits on the springs.

I have added three illustrations from a Bettendorf Co. brochure to the "GN Caboose Trucks" file on the Photos section. These show Bettendorf's Swing-Motion Caboose Truck, their cast Transom and a cross section view which I hope will better explain how these trucks are set up.

Notice that the center line of the leaf springs are inboard of the side frames. This is why less of the leaf springs are visible from trackside.

The transoms on GN's cabooses are kind of crude looking, IMO, and GN was using freight car truck side frames instead of special ones as on the Bettendorf trucks. Perhaps Great Northern fabricated these trucks themselves? AFAIK, these are unique to GN.

Brian Leppert
Tahoe Model Works
Carson City, NV

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "aaejj2j" <tyrone.johnsen@...> wrote:




I have posted four prototype photos and one model photo of an Andrews truck as used on the shorter GN cabooses in the Photos section in a new file called GN Caboose Trucks. Of interest here is the spring chamber area. I am interested in information or thoughts on the approach the GN used on these caboose trucks. The GN had similar caboose trucks with "Bettendorf" T-section and perhaps U-section sideframes which utilized the same or nearly the same spring chamber. About up to 1940 the GN cabooses generally used archbar trucks but these 25' wood cabooses were upgraded about in the 1940s and received new trucks, generally Andrews and Bettendorf T-section sideframes. The 1945 and later 30' cabooses like the Ambroid, Northeastern, and PFM Tenshodo models had U-section sideframes with similar spring chambers. I wonder if this approach was unique to the GN or if others had similar trucks. The trucks have a 5-0 or so wheel base and probably came off older freight cars which might have gotten newer trucks of higher load capability. The spring chamber appears to have been flame cut (on the ends) out of a box section of steel. The bolster is seen farther inward.
I photographed this on a car on private property in MT along US 2 and the old GN tracks; but from photos I have seen it is representative. Some older photos may show a sheet metal over the area above the springs. Note I added a plastic foot long ruler to help me determine various lengths.
Of course what I have been trying to do is improve the trucks on my cabooses as I do not like the brass trucks for operation and no plastic framed trucks look correct. Most model trucks are longer wheelbased and if they have real springs their spring chamber seems unrealistically wide. Trucks such as CV or Kadee are often modified with the old Walthers, Silver Streak, Kemtron (I think I have all of these) metal springs result in the springs protruding too far outward, visible bolster end, and too wide a spring opening and without the appropriate enclosure. I have modified some model trucks as IM. I have many more photos and some with dimensions added and some of various model trucks and conversions for those who may be willing or interested.
Thank you,
Tyrone Johnsen
Rockford, IL


Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola

michaelegross <michaelEGross@...>
 

Lovely work overall, and that coupler striker plate is a gem!

Cheers!

Michael Gross

On Feb 28, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Bernice wrote:

I just posted 5 photos to the photo album;

Haskell & Barker Wood Side-Dump Gondola

These show my continuing progress on this famous car.

It has been a lot of work getting to this point. I had to make a master of the coupler striker-plate, cast it in a rubber mold, then resin-cast the parts. The one picture shows the mold, etc. There was no such suitable part available from a model company. Took a long time to make it. (2 attempts at making the master because the first one breaking after construction. Very delicate structure.)

I also had to scratchbuild each large, rectangular truss-rod, end-beam washer, and the brake ratchet-handle assembly with chain to the brake cylinder.

Still have a lot of work to do on the side dump-door rods and mechanism.

I'm intending on building 3 or more of these cars. The initial work, casting and planning will make it easier for completing the others.

This car has been very labor intensive, starting with an F&C model. Back in 1906 these composite cars sure took a lot of original parts.

Paul Hillman



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


Re: 1944 AAR 10'-6" IH Box Car for Monon

Rob & Bev Manley
 

Michael,
I checked at my LHS, Park Lane in Dyer IN,, where I bought my 2 cars. She is sold out but does have four of the Branchline 50' BCR cars.
Let me know if you need any.

Rob Manley
Midwest Mod-U-Trak
"Better modeling through personal embarrassment"

----- Original Message -----
From: michaelegross
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] 1944 AAR 10'-6" IH Box Car for Monon



Dear Richard,

Many thanks for that information, Richard, and I am delighted that Red Caboose has it covered, as I would love to use those decals without going to heaps of trouble. Protocraft was wrong in their description, then, as they specified those cars were delivered later. I'm not a bit surprised that you set it right!

Once again, you come to the rescue! ☺ Many thanks!

Cheers!

Michael

Michael Gross
4431 Woodleigh Lane
La Cañada, CA 91011-3542
Home: (818) 790-2613
Cell: (818) 370-3087
IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0343447/

On Feb 27, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Richard Hendrickson wrote:

> On Feb 27, 2012, at 3:22 PM, atsfnut wrote:
> > Gentlemen:
> >
> > I am fairly new to the group and, though primarily a Santa Fe
> > modeler, I have an old set of Champ decals with the Monon "Hoosier
> > Line" slogan to the right of the door, and would love to paint and
> > decal a box car to accept these decals. I note on the O-Scale
> > Protocraft website that they offer a set of decals for that Monon
> > car, which they say was a 1944 aar 10'-6 " IH box car from pullman-
> > standard, lot 5860. I can't quite tell from the Protocraft photo on
> > the site what the end configuration of that car might be, but it
> > looks to be a 4/4.
> >
> > The description is at: http://protocraft.com/category.cfm?
> > ItemID=305&Categoryid=20
> >
> > My question: is there a manufactured car out there for that 1944
> > AAR car, or might this entail a difficult kitbash?
> >
> Michael, AFAIK the Monon received no new AAR steel box cars in 1944.
> They had a series of AAR 1937 spec. box cars built in 1941-'42 and a
> series of postwar AAR box cars built in 1947. The Champ decal set
> was intended for the '41 cars in the 9000-9449 series as repainted
> after WW II (the reweigh date in the decal set is 12-46), NOT for the
> '47 cars which had 4/4 Improved Dreadnaught ends and 10'6" IH. The
> best model for the 9000 series cars is the Red Caboose '37 AAR box
> car, and in fact RC made a special run of those cars with the
> original P/L scheme for the Monon historical society several years
> ago. The RC kits include the Superior 7 panel doors with which the
> Monon 9000 series cars were equipped, but you'll need a pair of HO
> scale National B-1 trucks. I don't have a photo of a 9000 series car
> in the late '40s P/L, but I'm sending you off-list a photo of one as
> built.
>
> Richard Hendrickson
>
>
>
>

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





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


Re: Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
Since these documents were unofficial, I see no reason to assume they are 100% accurate. In fact, since I can show you examples of incorrect entries -- non-existent reporting marks, non-existent car numbers, I have no reason to assume that every cargo listing is accurate. But perhaps your powers of divination are greater than everyone else's. Pardon me for being so bold as to question the unquestionable.
Nice straw man, Tim. No one, including me, has ever said that time books were without ERROR. But you previously suggested that conductors would just guess at cargoes, which is a bit different from writing down a car number with a digit wrong (or having bad handwriting). Do you now accept that possibly waybills were the basis for the cargo listings in time books?

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: Detail Parts Help

Tim O'Connor
 

I think another kit with separate door stops is the Red Caboose ARA/X.29 box cars.

Tim O'Connor

----- Original Message -----
From: "lnbill" <fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 12:18:42 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Detail Parts Help

The door stops on the Accurail 8 panel SS boxcar would be a good match. Also the little kit issued by Standard Car Company (subsidiary of New England Rail service) to convert the above Accurail car to a door and a half car has parts that would work. Also might check the Grandt Line Camel Door parts.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, O Fenton Wells <srrfan1401@...> wrote:

Have you checked the Tichy door detail set? Their No. 3070. I believe it
has door stops.
Fenton

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:49 AM, mark <tavwot@...> wrote:

**


I have a F&C Wabash ss automobile box car and I need to replace the door
stops.I have looked but can't find suitable replacement parts.Does anyone
have any suggestions?Thanks in advance Mark McCoy tavwot@...


Re: Detail Parts Help

Bill Welch
 

The door stops on the Accurail 8 panel SS boxcar would be a good match. Also the little kit issued by Standard Car Company (subsidiary of New England Rail service) to convert the above Accurail car to a door and a half car has parts that would work. Also might check the Grandt Line Camel Door parts.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, O Fenton Wells <srrfan1401@...> wrote:

Have you checked the Tichy door detail set? Their No. 3070. I believe it
has door stops.
Fenton

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:49 AM, mark <tavwot@...> wrote:

**


I have a F&C Wabash ss automobile box car and I need to replace the door
stops.I have looked but can't find suitable replacement parts.Does anyone
have any suggestions?Thanks in advance Mark McCoy tavwot@...




--
Fenton Wells
3047 Creek Run
Sanford NC 27332
919-499-5545
srrfan1401@...




Re: C&WI Haskell & Barker Gondola

chapbob@...
 

Paul --

I'm not sure how famous the prototype is, but your model is definitely
headed that way. Great modeling!

Bob Chapman



Paul Hillman writes:

I just posted 5 photos to the photo album;

Haskell & Barker Wood Side-Dump Gondola

These show my continuing progress on this famous car.

It has been a lot of work getting to this point. I had to make a master of
the coupler striker-plate, cast it in a rubber mold, then resin-cast the
parts. The one picture shows the mold, etc. There was no such suitable part
available from a model company. Took a long time to make it. (2 attempts at
making the master because the first one breaking after construction. Very
delicate structure.)

I also had to scratchbuild each large, rectangular truss-rod, end-beam
washer, and the brake ratchet-handle assembly with chain to the brake cylinder.

Still have a lot of work to do on the side dump-door rods and mechanism.

I'm intending on building 3 or more of these cars. The initial work,
casting and planning will make it easier for completing the others.

This car has been very labor intensive, starting with an F&C model. Back
in 1906 these composite cars sure took a lot of original parts.

Paul Hillman


Re: Wine traveling on the Overland Route in 1949

Tim O'Connor
 

Sorry, it's the scientist in me, but a number is not "correct" because it is PLAUSIBLE. What you have found is information
that COULD be true, because it is not inconsistent with what you've found in an ORER or other roster source data. But how
on earth could you possibly cross-check the CONTENTS of freight cars unless you have the original waybills to correlate
to the conductors' books? I trust the records much more that Clark Propst and others have posted, which contain much more
detailed information about cargoes, origins and consignees.

It's all about how do you really know what you know. If the conductor transposes a few numbers on his sheet (are there no
dyslexic conductors?) or confuses SLRX with SRLX or something like that, are we certain that we'd always find it?

Tim O'Connor

----- Original Message -----
From: "dmamfahr" <mamfahr@comcast.net>

After analyzing many thousands of entries in various UP conductor's time books (source of the hand-written train consist records), I can tell you that they're surprisingly accurate. I've entered many records into Excel spreadsheets, then cross-checked the reporting marks, car numbers, car types, contents, destination codes, icing instructions, etc and I'll say that I've noted relatively few obvious errors. Sure there are mistakes, but after reviewing a typical book containing 2500 or so car records (total of ~13,000 data entries) I'll note something on the order of 50 errors, < 1/2 %.

Take care,

Mark

79901 - 79920 of 187156