Date   

Re: Another Shapeways report

Dennis Storzek
 

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

Time to clear up some misconceptions. There are two inkjet-type heads mounted back to back. One contains body material, the other contains support material, in this case wax. Each head is capable of dispensing its material onto any pixel in a layer in the same pass. Same resolution, same layer thickness... But where there was wax, those tiny marbles that were in contact with the wax will have oozed out from the surface, leaving a rough patch...
Thanks for the more detailed explanation, Tom. So, while the resolution is the same, the effect on surface finish is certainly detrimental. Which leads me to conclude that Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) isn't the right process for mechanical parts like brake cylinders and valves which by their very nature are going to have overhangs somewhere.

I wonder about SLA? From photos of parts like dental crowns it appears that can build an overhang, so long as it is continuous with all the fused material on a given layer, to a point... the Asiga web page makes a claim that their software automatically calculates where "support structures" are needed. The problem is, these support structures are then one with the finished part, and have to be cut away by hand, maybe just a sprue nipper job, maybe much worse.

As to the surface finish on the part in my photo relative to everyone else's, keep in mind my triple valve is but a fraction of the size of what anyone else has posted photos of, so the magnification is much higher.

Dennis


Re: ARA/AAR Loading Rules

Gene <bierglaeser@...>
 

Thanks, Guy, I think that answers my questions quite well.
I'll contact you off-list.
Gene Green

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Guy Wilber <guycwilber@...> wrote:

Gene,

The Open Top Loading Rules were printed annually with very few exceptions from 1934 (when they were separated from Closed Car Rules) up until 1948. The Mechanical Division controlled the Open Top Rules from 1934 forward while Closed Car Rules were controlled by the Transportation Division. The Open Top Rules were mandatory as per the Interchange Rules.

In 1948 the Open Top Loading Rules Committee followed the requests of both shippers and the carriers and divided the full manual into the pamphlets you have in your collection, the first being issued in 1950. All six were revised thru 1959 via supplements and new editions. In 1959 all were combined into a new loose leaf publication first issued in 1960.

I can help you with any of the "Cat" diagrams if you have need.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada



Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:33 AM, "Gene" <bierglaeser@...> wrote:

Among others, my collection includes the following loading rules booklets.
MD-1 Sept 1, 1950 Steel Products Excluding Pipe On Open Top Cars
MD-2 Feb 1, 1951 Machinery On Open Top Cars
MD-3 June 1, 1951 Forest Products On Open Top Cars
MD-4 Jun 15, 1951 Pipe On Open Top Cars
MD-5 July 1, 1951 Miscellaneous Commodities On Open Top Cars
MD-6 Mar 1, 1952 Road Grading, Road Making, and Farm Equipment Machinery On Open Top Cars
MD-7 May 15, 1955 1 Department of Defense Material On Open Top Cars

Since I model September 1950 all but the first one may be wrong for modeling purposes to some unknown extant or another. My main interest is modeling loads of tractors and, to a lesser extent, Caterpillar equipment out of Peoria so presumably the next earlier edition of MD-6 is of greatest interest.

My next earlier one Commodities on Open Top Cars dated January 1, 1936.

Was anything published in between?
Is there a master list of Loading Rules as published?
Since I can't get to any decent train, modeling or railroadiana shows my source has been eBay. Are there any better suggestions to find loading rules?

Gene Green




Re: The right trucks - and the right bearings, for the archives - wrap-up

richard haave
 

I believe the "No hump" was due to concerns about bearing
damage if couplings were harsh. The car end away for joint tends
to go straight up and then comes down hard on bearings. In
today's railroading if a loaded car (roller bearing of course)
is derailed the bearings on the derailed axles must be inspected
and/or changed due to the pounding the bearings absorb when
bouncing over ties, etc. Empty cars car go about half a car
length derailed before inspection needed.

Dick Haave
***************************



In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Evans" <devans1@...> wrote:


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Frank Greene <frgreene290@> wrote:

On 10/14/2012 12:21 AM, Dave Evans wrote:
... 1b) The C&O cars included a fat white strip under part of Chesapeake and Ohio to indicate they were roller bearing equipped. Steve Lucas has a 1958 ETT that makes note of this mark, and instructs crews in special handling of RB equipped cars, since the slippery little devils will roll a lot more at low speeds than plain journal bearing equipped cars. It would be useful to know if other ETT's of the late STMFC era had similar notations, and if that might mean specific marks need to be included on 1950's STMFC models from railroads other than the C&O.

Scanning through several Southern Railway ETTs from 1954-'58 did not
identify any special instructions for roller bearing equipped cars. On
roller bearing equipped boxcars and covered hoppers, Southern Railway
stenciled "[brand name] ROLLER BEARINGS" in 2 1/2" letters on the side
sill near the right bolster.


2a)The limited deployment of RB's in the STMFC era had little impact on freight train performance, although it did impact some individual car handling tasks, such as the C&O ETT instruction to not hump RB equipped cars and apply special practices for spotting RB equipped cars. It would be interesting to know if other ETT's and/or rulebooks had similar rules/guidance.

Why not hump roller bearing equipped hopper cars?

--

Frank Greene
Memphis, TN
Frank,

Thanks for checking the ETT's. Where is it written about the cars being labeled RB equipped? I wonder if it was an AAR rule? Or each railroad did their own thing?

At the low speeds of a hump yard, a roller bearing equipped car would roll much further, and could reach the string of cars at the end of the track at a much higher speed.

For an automatic retarder, I would expect the amount of retarding would need to be changed for a roller bearing equipped car versus a plain bearing equipped car (I think automatic retarders were already adjusting for car weight). Over on OpSig a professional railroader indicated that modern hump yard retarders now take wind speed/direction into account because the cars are so free wheeling.

I suspect it would also require very different handling by a hump rider manually controlling the brake (although one would expect quick adaptation if the riders were instructed in the difference.) Perhaps C&O was reacting to damaged cargo from too-high hump impacts, or possibly injuries to riders?

So I suspect the Southern RB marking was to at least help someone working a hump yard (retarder controls or riders - either one).

Were hump riders ever outlawed? Or did the railroads find them too expensive (in pay or in damaged contents)?

Dave Evans


Re: ARA/AAR Loading Rules

Guy Wilber
 

Gene,

The Open Top Loading Rules were printed annually with very few exceptions from 1934 (when they were separated from Closed Car Rules) up until 1948. The Mechanical Division controlled the Open Top Rules from 1934 forward while Closed Car Rules were controlled by the Transportation Division. The Open Top Rules were mandatory as per the Interchange Rules.

In 1948 the Open Top Loading Rules Committee followed the requests of both shippers and the carriers and divided the full manual into the pamphlets you have in your collection, the first being issued in 1950. All six were revised thru 1959 via supplements and new editions. In 1959 all were combined into a new loose leaf publication first issued in 1960.

I can help you with any of the "Cat" diagrams if you have need.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada
On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:33 AM, "Gene" <bierglaeser@yahoo.com> wrote:

Among others, my collection includes the following loading rules booklets.
MD-1 Sept 1, 1950 Steel Products Excluding Pipe On Open Top Cars
MD-2 Feb 1, 1951 Machinery On Open Top Cars
MD-3 June 1, 1951 Forest Products On Open Top Cars
MD-4 Jun 15, 1951 Pipe On Open Top Cars
MD-5 July 1, 1951 Miscellaneous Commodities On Open Top Cars
MD-6 Mar 1, 1952 Road Grading, Road Making, and Farm Equipment Machinery On Open Top Cars
MD-7 May 15, 1955 1 Department of Defense Material On Open Top Cars

Since I model September 1950 all but the first one may be wrong for modeling purposes to some unknown extant or another. My main interest is modeling loads of tractors and, to a lesser extent, Caterpillar equipment out of Peoria so presumably the next earlier edition of MD-6 is of greatest interest.

My next earlier one Commodities on Open Top Cars dated January 1, 1936.

Was anything published in between?
Is there a master list of Loading Rules as published?
Since I can't get to any decent train, modeling or railroadiana shows my source has been eBay. Are there any better suggestions to find loading rules?

Gene Green


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


Re: Lining Stock Cars

Guy Wilber
 

Doug,

I should have mentioned that in this case both sides were papered.

It is noted that at least one side should be papered within the ARA Freight Claims Division Bulletin.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada

On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:19 AM, "Douglas Harding" <doug.harding@iowacentralrr.org> wrote:

Guy, thanks for that interesting little fact. The description indicates
preparation for transport during winter months in one of the northern
states. As hay was typically used only during the winter. Was the entire car
lined, or just one side?

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

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


ARA/AAR Loading Rules

Gene <bierglaeser@...>
 

Among others, my collection includes the following loading rules booklets.
MD-1 Sept 1, 1950 Steel Products Excluding Pipe On Open Top Cars
MD-2 Feb 1, 1951 Machinery On Open Top Cars
MD-3 June 1, 1951 Forest Products On Open Top Cars
MD-4 Jun 15, 1951 Pipe On Open Top Cars
MD-5 July 1, 1951 Miscellaneous Commodities On Open Top Cars
MD-6 Mar 1, 1952 Road Grading, Road Making, and Farm Equipment Machinery On Open Top Cars
MD-7 May 15, 1955 1 Department of Defense Material On Open Top Cars

Since I model September 1950 all but the first one may be wrong for modeling purposes to some unknown extant or another. My main interest is modeling loads of tractors and, to a lesser extent, Caterpillar equipment out of Peoria so presumably the next earlier edition of MD-6 is of greatest interest.

My next earlier one Commodities on Open Top Cars dated January 1, 1936.

Was anything published in between?
Is there a master list of Loading Rules as published?
Since I can't get to any decent train, modeling or railroadiana shows my source has been eBay. Are there any better suggestions to find loading rules?

Gene Green


Re: Lining Stock Cars

Douglas Harding
 

Guy, thanks for that interesting little fact. The description indicates
preparation for transport during winter months in one of the northern
states. As hay was typically used only during the winter. Was the entire car
lined, or just one side?



Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org


Re: Freight Forwarding

Dan Sweeney Jr
 

Charles, thank you for your extensive research and analysis on this topic, and on the topic of switching districts. It is very valuable and appreciated.
Dan Sweeney, Jr.
Alexandria, VA

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Hostetler" <cesicjh@...> wrote:

Good Evening All,

I've posted some information on freight forwarding traffic as it was practiced between 1947 and 1960 at:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2012/10/commodity-class-950-forwarder-traffic.html

The information includes some background material about freight forwarding, some examples of freight forwarding facilities, temporal changes during the 1950s, the types of freight cars used in the freight forwarding business, and a state to state distribution of forwarding traffic from 1957. The data are mostly from the 1% Carload Waybill Survey.

A number of the larger (and some of the more modest-sized) cities had freight forwarders during the transition era and this type of freight traffic could make an interesting contrast to LCL and regular freight operations.

Regards,

Charles Hostetler


Re: GN boxcar information needed on cars in the 9731 series.

Staffan Ehnbom <staffan.ehnbom@...>
 

The built, or rebuild dates rather, for the GN 9000 series as shown in the diagrams and in photos is 1925.

Staffan Ehnbom

----- Original Message -----
From: gary laakso
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 1:49 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] GN boxcar information needed on cars in the 9731 series.



The 9000-9999 boxcars were trussrod boxcars rebuilt with inverted Murphy metal ends and with the 8 truss rods retained with steel center sills. CB&Q used a very similar design and did the same upgrade. Both companies replaced the wood roofs with steel Murphy XLA roof.
The cars were long lasting and 7 made it to January 1, 1959. Of course, that is in revenue service, they soldiered on in MOW service. The 1923 re-build date is correct for accounting and tax purposes, though they were rebuilt cars originally built as early as 1901.

I have 3 of the Westerfield kits ready for decalling and they join the other 14 Westerfield GN trussrod cars and 5 CB&Q truss rod cars. For variety, two of the CGW 1932 ARA boxcars were completed and ready for sides and ends painting. The 3 NP 14000 series double sheathed boxcars are waiting for TruColor NP freight car red paint to arrive.

gary laakso
south of Mike Brock
vasa0vasa@earthlink.net
From: Bob McCarthy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 3:45 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] GN boxcar information needed on cars in the 9731 series.

Good afternoon!

Jerry Glow sent me some artwork for a GN boxcar #9731 which appears to have been 7'10" IH DS which is rather low for the build date indicated.

Also, according to the artwork the car survived long enough to acquire AB brakes and received a date of 10/52 on the car body. Unfortunately, his customer did not supply information needed to determine what the actual boxcar looked like.

According to Jerry's decal artwork the car was built in 7/23. It shows truss rods. However, I am aware that there were a number of cars built between 1913 (NP) and 1924 (SR) combining both truss rods and either a fishbelly or steel channel stock underframe.

Having just completed a early 1913 NP radial roof truss rod 40' DS 8' IH boxcar, I discovered a later 1913 NP radial roof truss rod/fishbelly 40' DS 8'7" IH boxcar which I also plan to build. This creates the need to know more about the GN boxcar group. They appear to have a 7'10" IH which is low for 1923 and also truss rods. (Perhaps steel or fishbelly underframe as well).

If any one on this list has access to drawings, images, or any other information on the group of boxcars into which GN 9731 falls I would appreciate being contacted off list.

When completed I would be glad to share images of the various boxcars of the 1910-1930 period that I am building with this list.

Thanks,

Bob McCarthy

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

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





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


Re: Another Shapeways report

Bob McCarthy
 

Rob,

      Please contact me off list.  Have questions about your parts that do not belong on this list.


Thanks,

Bob McCarthy




________________________________
From: Rob Kirkham <rdkirkham@live.ca>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Another Shapeways report


 
I see the photos of my latest projects have been approved now. They are at:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/219763914/pic/list?order=ordinal>

Rob Kirkham

Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 5:35 PM
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Another Shapeways report

I've posted a number of photos of my own recent experiments with 3d printing
(waiting for them to be approved). These were done by ADC (Advanced Design
Concepts) - but as far as I know they use the same machine and substance as
Shapeways. Overall I am quite happy with the parts I received.

The first photos show tank car underframes for CPR 389xxx series tank cars.
The cars looked a lot like the Athearn single dome tank (and also like an SP
prototype Tony Thompson has written about modelling). I've been muddling my
way through this project for a number of years, but this is the closest I've
come to an acceptable frame model. At this point the issues are in my
design errors - not the material or process used by ADC. that said, I can
see some grain in the part that may show through the paint. And the
particles that are fused to make the part do produce some "noise" when under
magnification. But for frame parts that will be largely hidden beneath
running boards and the tank itself, I think this is acceptable quality for
now.

The other part is an inverted Murphy end used on the CPR's 2975xx series
single sheathed automobile boxcars. The rest of the model is still in
process. Again one can see some waviness in the flat surfaces, and some
imperfections in the corrugations, but overall I think it is a satisfactory
starting point for the model. My photography isn't good enough to show the
rivets along the edges, but they are there too.

I've been using Bestine rubber cement thinner to clean the waxy stuff of the
parts with success so far. A few minutes in that stuff cleans them and
changes the parts from translucent to opaque white and cleans some of the
wax away.

One thing about ADC - they focus on your job so the parts are oriented as
you would like. The auto-box end was modelled laying on the interior side
of the model. Interesting that the view of the back shows more of the
printing texture. I assume that is the wax support - and "yes" it is far
more grainy than any other surface of the model.

By the way this ties into the other thread re the UP boxcars - as, for
example, I believe this process allows one to build the ends without hacking
up Tichy parts. Of course some of you are skilled enough that you don't
hack, but for those of us who do . . . .

Rob Kirkham





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


FGE/WFE/BRE at Naperville

Bill Welch
 

Earlier this year I succumbed to my experience of 13 years as a photojournalist when realized as I worked on the FGE/WFE/BRE book that I needed to begin to see the photos I have on the page with text, tables, maps, etc. Then I found exactly the classes I needed at St. Pete College to help me learn Adobe's InDesign and Illustrator and I was also able to purchase their Creative Suite as a student. For several weeks now I have been experimenting and applying the learning.

The long and the short of this is that I will have two Prototype chapters with me at Naperville to show interested folks and see and hear their response. These are chapters include three different groups of refrigerator cars that provide a look at my approach to covering the fleet. If you want to see what I am doing, just ask me for a look.

Among the things I would like responses/opinions on are my choice of page orientation, type size, and the number of photos (am I using too many?).

Bill Welch
2225 Nursery Road; #20-104
Clearwater, FL 33764-7622
727-470-9930
fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com

P.S. While on my way to Naperville, via Galesburg, IL for more research I had dinner in Murfreesboro, TN with two former photojournalist colleagues Sunday and I already have tweaks to make.


Re: Another Shapeways report

Robert kirkham
 

I see the photos of my latest projects have been approved now. They are at: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/219763914/pic/list?order=ordinal>

Rob Kirkham

Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 5:35 PM
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Another Shapeways report

I've posted a number of photos of my own recent experiments with 3d printing
(waiting for them to be approved). These were done by ADC (Advanced Design
Concepts) - but as far as I know they use the same machine and substance as
Shapeways. Overall I am quite happy with the parts I received.

The first photos show tank car underframes for CPR 389xxx series tank cars.
The cars looked a lot like the Athearn single dome tank (and also like an SP
prototype Tony Thompson has written about modelling). I've been muddling my
way through this project for a number of years, but this is the closest I've
come to an acceptable frame model. At this point the issues are in my
design errors - not the material or process used by ADC. that said, I can
see some grain in the part that may show through the paint. And the
particles that are fused to make the part do produce some "noise" when under
magnification. But for frame parts that will be largely hidden beneath
running boards and the tank itself, I think this is acceptable quality for
now.

The other part is an inverted Murphy end used on the CPR's 2975xx series
single sheathed automobile boxcars. The rest of the model is still in
process. Again one can see some waviness in the flat surfaces, and some
imperfections in the corrugations, but overall I think it is a satisfactory
starting point for the model. My photography isn't good enough to show the
rivets along the edges, but they are there too.

I've been using Bestine rubber cement thinner to clean the waxy stuff of the
parts with success so far. A few minutes in that stuff cleans them and
changes the parts from translucent to opaque white and cleans some of the
wax away.

One thing about ADC - they focus on your job so the parts are oriented as
you would like. The auto-box end was modelled laying on the interior side
of the model. Interesting that the view of the back shows more of the
printing texture. I assume that is the wax support - and "yes" it is far
more grainy than any other surface of the model.

By the way this ties into the other thread re the UP boxcars - as, for
example, I believe this process allows one to build the ends without hacking
up Tichy parts. Of course some of you are skilled enough that you don't
hack, but for those of us who do . . . .

Rob Kirkham


Re: GN boxcar information needed on cars in the 9731 series.

gary laakso
 

The 9000-9999 boxcars were trussrod boxcars rebuilt with inverted Murphy metal ends and with the 8 truss rods retained with steel center sills. CB&Q used a very similar design and did the same upgrade. Both companies replaced the wood roofs with steel Murphy XLA roof.
The cars were long lasting and 7 made it to January 1, 1959. Of course, that is in revenue service, they soldiered on in MOW service. The 1923 re-build date is correct for accounting and tax purposes, though they were rebuilt cars originally built as early as 1901.

I have 3 of the Westerfield kits ready for decalling and they join the other 14 Westerfield GN trussrod cars and 5 CB&Q truss rod cars. For variety, two of the CGW 1932 ARA boxcars were completed and ready for sides and ends painting. The 3 NP 14000 series double sheathed boxcars are waiting for TruColor NP freight car red paint to arrive.

gary laakso
south of Mike Brock
vasa0vasa@earthlink.net
From: Bob McCarthy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 3:45 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] GN boxcar information needed on cars in the 9731 series.


Good afternoon!

Jerry Glow sent me some artwork for a GN boxcar #9731 which appears to have been 7'10" IH DS which is rather low for the build date indicated.

Also, according to the artwork the car survived long enough to acquire AB brakes and received a date of 10/52 on the car body. Unfortunately, his customer did not supply information needed to determine what the actual boxcar looked like.

According to Jerry's decal artwork the car was built in 7/23. It shows truss rods. However, I am aware that there were a number of cars built between 1913 (NP) and 1924 (SR) combining both truss rods and either a fishbelly or steel channel stock underframe.

Having just completed a early 1913 NP radial roof truss rod 40' DS 8' IH boxcar, I discovered a later 1913 NP radial roof truss rod/fishbelly 40' DS 8'7" IH boxcar which I also plan to build. This creates the need to know more about the GN boxcar group. They appear to have a 7'10" IH which is low for 1923 and also truss rods. (Perhaps steel or fishbelly underframe as well).

If any one on this list has access to drawings, images, or any other information on the group of boxcars into which GN 9731 falls I would appreciate being contacted off list.

When completed I would be glad to share images of the various boxcars of the 1910-1930 period that I am building with this list.

Thanks,

Bob McCarthy

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


Re: Another Shapeways report

Tom Madden
 

Dennis wrote:

I am now realizing that the process used by Shapeways has another pitfall; the basic process can't build parts with overhangs, since there would be nothing to support the first layer of resin that hangs past the previous layer, so the process used by Shapeways builds a wax structure to support this first layer. Unfortunately, it appears that the wax construction is done at a considerably coarser resolution than the actual part, and any surface built against the wax picks up this coarser resolution.
Time to clear up some misconceptions. There are two inkjet-type heads mounted back to back. One contains body material, the other contains support material, in this case wax. Each head is capable of dispensing its material onto any pixel in a layer in the same pass. Same resolution, same layer thickness. On our PolyJet machine, a high-intensity UV light is mounted on the print head in the trailing position and cures the material almost as fast as it is deposited, "almost" being the key word. More on that shortly. I don't know if Shapeways' MultiJet FUD process uses a moving lamp or flashes each layer as it is completed, but the effect is the same - deposit first, then cure.

Think of your part suspended above the build platform and casting a shadow. A few layers of wax are laid down in the exact pattern of that shadow. This permits the part to be removed from the platform. If your part is, say, a cube, no more wax would be required - every layer from there on up would be body material only. If your part was a pyramid, built with the point up, that too would require no more wax. But if you built your pyramid with the point down, the first layer above the wax base would be all wax except one lonely spot of body material in the center. (Keep thinking of the shadow of the upside-down pyramid.) In the next layer the center spot would be larger and recognizably square, but the rest of the layer would be wax. And so on, until the top layer, which would be all body material. The point is, there has to be something underneath the body material on every layer. If it's not other body material, it has to be wax. If you were building a pyramid with a cube balanced on the tip, the pyramid would be completely encased in the wax that provides support for the bottom of the cube. Every overhanging portion of an object will have wax support material under the overhang.

Back to that "almost" issue. Uncured body material is a gel. In the few milliseconds after a pixel of body material is laid down and before it is cured, it conforms to the underlying surface and to its neighbors. Curing the material bonds it to that underlying surface, if that surface is body material. The problems come at the interfaces. An uncured pixel of body material in the middle of a row will merge with its neighbors, while the end pixels in contact with air will pretty much hold their shapes. But if there's wax at the end of that row, the end pixel will merge with the wax pixel and lose its shape. Think of a vertical sidewall as a matrix of tiny marbles. In the absence of wax, under magnification the sidewall will appear uniformly granular. But where there was wax, those tiny marbles that were in contact with the wax will have oozed out from the surface, leaving a rough patch. You can see that in the faces of the double steam control box that was built standing on one end:
http://www.pullmanproject.com/Shapeways10.jpg

The three wax tracks go all the way up to the overhanging cleats on the mirrored component. Fortunately, I only needed one of each (left & right) to serve as resin casting masters, and the part that was built face up provided those.

Hope this all helps understand the process.

Tom Madden


Re: The right trucks - and the right bearings, for the archives - wrap-up

devansprr
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Frank Greene <frgreene290@...> wrote:

On 10/14/2012 12:21 AM, Dave Evans wrote:
... 1b) The C&O cars included a fat white strip under part of Chesapeake and Ohio to indicate they were roller bearing equipped. Steve Lucas has a 1958 ETT that makes note of this mark, and instructs crews in special handling of RB equipped cars, since the slippery little devils will roll a lot more at low speeds than plain journal bearing equipped cars. It would be useful to know if other ETT's of the late STMFC era had similar notations, and if that might mean specific marks need to be included on 1950's STMFC models from railroads other than the C&O.

Scanning through several Southern Railway ETTs from 1954-'58 did not
identify any special instructions for roller bearing equipped cars. On
roller bearing equipped boxcars and covered hoppers, Southern Railway
stenciled "[brand name] ROLLER BEARINGS" in 2 1/2" letters on the side
sill near the right bolster.


2a)The limited deployment of RB's in the STMFC era had little impact on freight train performance, although it did impact some individual car handling tasks, such as the C&O ETT instruction to not hump RB equipped cars and apply special practices for spotting RB equipped cars. It would be interesting to know if other ETT's and/or rulebooks had similar rules/guidance.

Why not hump roller bearing equipped hopper cars?

--

Frank Greene
Memphis, TN
Frank,

Thanks for checking the ETT's. Where is it written about the cars being labeled RB equipped? I wonder if it was an AAR rule? Or each railroad did their own thing?

At the low speeds of a hump yard, a roller bearing equipped car would roll much further, and could reach the string of cars at the end of the track at a much higher speed.

For an automatic retarder, I would expect the amount of retarding would need to be changed for a roller bearing equipped car versus a plain bearing equipped car (I think automatic retarders were already adjusting for car weight). Over on OpSig a professional railroader indicated that modern hump yard retarders now take wind speed/direction into account because the cars are so free wheeling.

I suspect it would also require very different handling by a hump rider manually controlling the brake (although one would expect quick adaptation if the riders were instructed in the difference.) Perhaps C&O was reacting to damaged cargo from too-high hump impacts, or possibly injuries to riders?

So I suspect the Southern RB marking was to at least help someone working a hump yard (retarder controls or riders - either one).

Were hump riders ever outlawed? Or did the railroads find them too expensive (in pay or in damaged contents)?

Dave Evans


GN boxcar information needed on cars in the 9731 series.

Bob McCarthy
 

Good afternoon!

     Jerry Glow sent me some artwork for a GN boxcar #9731 which appears to have been 7'10" IH DS which is rather low for the build date indicated. 

Also, according to the artwork the car survived long enough to acquire AB brakes and received a date of 10/52 on the car body.  Unfortunately, his customer did not supply information needed to determine what the actual boxcar looked like.

     According to Jerry's decal artwork the car was built in 7/23.  It shows truss rods.  However, I am aware that there were a number of cars built between 1913 (NP) and 1924 (SR) combining both truss rods and either a fishbelly or steel channel stock underframe.

     Having just completed a early 1913 NP radial roof truss rod 40' DS 8' IH boxcar, I discovered a later 1913 NP radial roof truss rod/fishbelly 40' DS 8'7" IH boxcar which I also plan to build.  This creates the need to know more about the GN boxcar group.  They appear to have a 7'10" IH which is low for 1923 and also truss rods.  (Perhaps steel or fishbelly underframe as well).


     If any one on this list has access to drawings, images, or any other information on the group of boxcars into which GN 9731 falls I would appreciate being contacted off list.

     When completed I would be glad to share images of the various boxcars of the 1910-1930 period that I am building with this list.


Thanks,

Bob McCarthy

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


Re: The right trucks - and the right bearings, for the archives - wrap-up

Frank Greene
 

On 10/14/2012 12:21 AM, Dave Evans wrote:
... 1b) The C&O cars included a fat white strip under part of Chesapeake and Ohio to indicate they were roller bearing equipped. Steve Lucas has a 1958 ETT that makes note of this mark, and instructs crews in special handling of RB equipped cars, since the slippery little devils will roll a lot more at low speeds than plain journal bearing equipped cars. It would be useful to know if other ETT's of the late STMFC era had similar notations, and if that might mean specific marks need to be included on 1950's STMFC models from railroads other than the C&O.

Scanning through several Southern Railway ETTs from 1954-'58 did not identify any special instructions for roller bearing equipped cars. On roller bearing equipped boxcars and covered hoppers, Southern Railway stenciled "[brand name] ROLLER BEARINGS" in 2 1/2" letters on the side sill near the right bolster.


2a)The limited deployment of RB's in the STMFC era had little impact on freight train performance, although it did impact some individual car handling tasks, such as the C&O ETT instruction to not hump RB equipped cars and apply special practices for spotting RB equipped cars. It would be interesting to know if other ETT's and/or rulebooks had similar rules/guidance.

Why not hump roller bearing equipped hopper cars?

--

Frank Greene
Memphis, TN


Re: L&N and NKP gons and flat

Steven D Johnson
 

Bill,



Thanks for the information on the photos.



I have a photocopy of what I think is a builder's photo of L&N gondola #
26000, the first of 1,000 of those shorter gons that you mentioned. Also
have a copy of a ca. late 1940s lettering diagram for those cars.



Steve Johnson





From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
lnbill
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 1:59 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: L&N and NKP gons and flat





Steve

L&N 25884 from Bob's is a nice broadside shot in Wilson, NC on 2-2-1952 w/a
reweigh date of 1950. The Ameling photos of L&N 25823 are 1957 in Sarasota,
FL. Stenciling identical to 25884. These three include good views of each
end. L&N 25800, the Builder's Photo, cataloged as PA 182717, is a 3/4 shot
giving a good view of the "B" end.

BTW, Bob's is also the source for L&N 26371, which is a shorter gon also
w/wood sides and stake pockets. Southern had a similar car, both of which
resemble the PRR GR/GRa.

With Chad's new kit, virtually every gondola owned by the L&N into the
1950's can now be modeled in HO except the above small wood side gon.
Athearn has their (and NC&StL's) 65-ft mill gon. Westerfield's 45-ft USRA
mill gon can be used for the L&N's copy of these, Sunshine has their 40-ft
gon kit (and NC&StL's) and InterMountain has their USRA 40-ft composite gon.

Life is good!

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , "Steven D
Johnson" <tenncentralrwy@...> wrote:

Bill,



What are the dates on the one from Bob's Photos and those from the Ameling
collection?



Thanks,



Steve Johnson





From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
Of
lnbill
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 10:13 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Re: L&N and NKP gons and flat





Photos of the L&N gons are available. There is one available from Bob's
Photos and I think my MtV Builder's Photo came from the Merrilee's
Collection at the Archives of Canada. Then there is a group of 3 photos
shot
by Howard Ameling from different angles of a car loaded w/coal. I think
Mr.
Ameling's photos are now available through Cleveland St. Univ. where his
collection is deposited. My memory is I made these available to Chad to
assist his pattern making and the necessary decals.

Bill Welch

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

Steve,
Yes it is. The flats are from the 22000-22249, 24300-24549, and
24550-24799.
Chad Boas

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , "Steven D
Johnson" <tenncentralrwy@> wrote:

Chad,



Is your L&N gondola based on the 25800-25999 series cars built by Mt.
Vernon
Car Mfg. Co. in 1928?



Steve Johnson





From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
Of Chad
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 9:31 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Re: L&N and NKP gons and flat





Thanks, Bill
These are from your suggestion. I think there was a NKP flat car made
from
these. Still looking for conformation. There were some flats listed
that
were 50'9".
Also, I added photos of the NKP. Should be able to get it painted over
the
weekend.
Chad Boas

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

Okay, on 3 let's all chant Chad--Chad--Chad--you're the
man--Chad--...

One, two, ...

Bill Welch

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

All,
The next round of kits will be the wood side gons for L&N and NKP.
The L&N is a 46'9" and can be either a flat car or can be ordered
with
the sides parts. The NKP is a 50'9" wood side gon. The kits will
include
the
Red Caboose pockets for the wood sides.
I have added a file called L&N and NKP gons and flat. The L&N car
is
there and I am working on getting a picture of the NKP.
I will have these cars avalible for Naperville.
Contact me off list for more information.
Thanks, Chad Boas











Lining Stock Cars

Guy Wilber
 

For Mr. Harding and interested others;

I found a photo of the interior of a stock car (circa 1927) that had been lined with what was termed, "Construction Paper". It does indeed seem to be classic roofing felt paper. I had previously commented that I didn't think that roofing felt would have been used, but am proved wrong by the photo and accompanying text.

The paper is applied on the inside of the car with lath running both parallel to the stock car slats as well as perpendicular lath (appearing to be about every six feet or so). Paper seems to go up about six feet on the inside of the car. The car was bedded with the typical sand and a generous amount of hay. The car was specified for cattle, but was likely typical of cars lined and bedded for hogs or other livestock as well.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada










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


Trying to contact Schuyler Larrabee

npin53
 

Could Schuyler Larrabee please contact me off list? Thank you.

Aaron

76221 - 76240 of 187861