Date   

New Rapido 52' 6" Mill Gondola

geodyssey <riverob@...>
 

Rapido is producing a Canadian (National Steel Car & Eastern Car Company) mill gon. Nice looking model:
http://www.rapidotrains.com/rapidonewscurrent.html#anchor2

Is this model accurate for, or very close to, any gons owned by a US railroad?

Thanks,
Robert Simpson


Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era car

Guy Wilber
 

Jim wrote:


"If my observations are correct the way that the air hoses
work is that the end of the air hose has a rubber grommet
(doughnut) in a cavity in the glad hand."

Jim,

What you are referring to as a "gland hand" is called the air brake hose
coupling which was fitted into and clamped to one end of the brake hose
(22-1/2'' long x 2-1/8" O.D.) while the other end of the hose was fitted over
and clamped to the air hose nipple, also cast in malleable iron. The
"grommet" was the air brake hose gasket.

The nipple was threaded into the angle cock which was equipped with a
"glad hand" in order to open or shut off the air flow. Though there were
dimensional specifications for the angle cock - no call out was made for the
material used in their manufacture. Angle cocks were positioned at an
angle of 30 degrees ( /) while looking at the end of the car.

Circa 1943 (slightly revised from 1939) preference for the center line of
the air line was 2-1/2" below the center line of the coupler and 12" to
the right of center. The location of the angle cock from the end of the car
was to be 15" from the pulling face of the coupler (back) to the center of
the glad hand.

All location dimensions were in relation to the coupler, not the car body
itself, and it was permissible to jockey them, though minimum and maximum
dimensions were established (and revised) within the formula developed by
the MCBA and modified by the ARA and AAR.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada


Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era cars ...

Tony Thompson
 

Denny Anspach wrote:
2) Hoses are mounted on an angle so that when the cars are coupled, the air hose ends will naturally meet. This can and does interfere with the common Kadee magnetic glad hands, depending upon length of coupler shank, and just how far out and how high the hose has been mounted.
As Sam Clarke of Kadee is wont to say, the projecting wire below the Kadee couplers is NOT an air hose and certainly not a glad hand, despite Denny apparently having convinced himself that it is. Kadee calls it a "trip pin" and always has. You may choose to think of it as "air-hose-like" or not.

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, tony@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era cars ...

Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Denny Anspach <danspachmd@...> wrote:

Friends, keep in mind at least some of the following-

1) The ubiquitous over-wide catfish-mouth HO coupler boxes that most of us have to deal with pushes the air hose location far to the side, IMHO a position relative to the coupler that can be quite unrealistic. This is ameriorated somewhat when the fishmouth is filled with an oversized melon-head coupler. The appearance is made worse when the same wide box holds a scale sized coupler- even more so if the coupler does not have a short shank.
Hi Doc, Long time-no see.

There is a placement diagram from the 1922 CBC here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/1103907548/pic/list

The steel car dimensions did not change appreciably for the remainder of our era of interest.

Dennis


Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era car

Jim Betz
 

Hi again,

I don't want to start a long 'argument' ... but I feel I have
to say what it is that I know (or think I know) that relates to
the color of the brake hoses, the glad hands, and the angle
cocks.

****

If my observations are correct the way that the air hoses
work is that the end of the air hose has a rubber grommet
(doughnut) in a cavity in the glad hand. And the other
glad hand has one also. And the two are compressed to
each other during the coupling up of the hoses in such a
way that the rubber grommets form the seal and the
hole in the grommet allows the air to flow thru the hose
coupling.
My recollection/observation is that the glad hand is a
cast metal piece - possible with some milling to form
the grommet cavity and the faces of the 'lock' that holds
them together. Definitely "no moving parts". You 'simply'
bend/twist the joint to make/break the coupling and the
casting of the metal forms the 'lock'.

I always have thought/assumed that the glad hand was
'just' cast iron/steel. And therefore the rusting of the
exposed surfaces is guaranteed by time. But the part of
the glad hand that the grommet contacts is kept smooth/
clean enough by the pressure/contact/compression of the
rubber grommet that it forms the seal.

I do not know what kind of metal is/was used on the
glad hands. Not sure I really care. They are probably
more than one kind of metal depending upon the
manufacturer and/or era.

Same is true for the angle cocks. The only part of them
that needs to be clean is the internal part that is the
actual valve. I would not be at all surprised to learn
that in the era of this list they were usually either
cast brass or cast galvanized. With some machined
surfaces/parts. And, since they activated with a 90-degree
turn they were most certainly a ball valve of some sort.

****

My observation/experience is that both are "always"
dirty/rusty in color (some shade of brown/tuscan/whatever
you want to call it). Perhaps they started out as galvanized
but they quickly got "too dirty to tell".

The hoses usually started out as black but a few were
red ... and they both got essentially grimy black quickly.

- Jim Betz


Re: Freight Car Measurements

George Corral <g.corral@...>
 

--- Charles Hostetler wrote:

I think there is value, especially for us beginners, to attempt some projects that are maybe a bit above our heads or maybe that just do things in a different way. As an aspiring steam era freight car prototype modeler my view is that our greatest need is for additional definitive prototype information, but that our biggest asset is an unsettled mind (yes I borrowed that line from Asimov...)
Hear hear!

I believe the work Charles is conducting on his own can lead to bigger and better things for our hobby. His knowledge and research could help in the design of accurate prototype models not currently available in today's market. In his endeavor to discover more about freight car design and the assets currently available in building them, I for one, learn along with him.

Thanks, Charles!

George Corral


Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era cars ...

Denny Anspach <danspachmd@...>
 

Friends, keep in mind at least some of the following-

1) The ubiquitous over-wide catfish-mouth HO coupler boxes that most of us have to deal with pushes the air hose location far to the side, IMHO a position relative to the coupler that can be quite unrealistic. This is ameriorated somewhat when the fishmouth is filled with an oversized melon-head coupler. The appearance is made worse when the same wide box holds a scale sized coupler- even more so if the coupler does not have a short shank.

2) Hoses are mounted on an angle so that when the cars are coupled, the air hose ends will naturally meet. This can and does interfere with the common Kadee magnetic glad hands, depending upon length of coupler shank, and just how far out and how high the hose has been mounted.

3) Air hose mountings for the cars in our era seem to be properly aligned along the transverse centerline of the coupler shank and as close to it as possible, and in many instances in this regard were physically fastened to the side of the coupler box. More ubiquitous were the cantilevered carbody mounted brackets carrying the pipe/hose junction outboard of the car end.

4) Standard air hose length changed significantly - in the early '60s as I recall- the air hoses after that date being much longer (c. 4"). This has created modeling problems. Some common detail sets still around for pre-60 cars have the long hoses (they drag between the rails and do not last long); and HiTech did not catch this fact early on, but subsequently owned-up and to their credit then produced the correct-length high quality hoses that we now have.

5) As a practical matter, on cars that we operate and use, the plastic hoses from Kadee and CalScale simply do not stand up to routine handling. For a long time, the only solution was to use the PSC brass hoses- which served quite well, and looked great (and still do). However, even they brea, or because of inherent rigidity, come loose from mounts when leveraged. In this respect, the HiTech rubber hoses have been an almost ideal solution. They look good, stand up to handling, and do not interfere with operations.

6) A long neglected air hose detail is the hose bracket or mount itself, a detail that has been neglected totally for decades except the lovely Kadee mounts common to logging cars. In response to this need several years ago, Dennis Storzek drew up and machined a beautiful HO scale pattern for a common steam era air hose mount, and Mont Switzer and I persuaded PSC to cast it in brass and put it in their catalogue. HiTech now produces a similar bracket, apparently in rubber (I have not seen nor tried them- but will soon!).

7) What do I do? My current standard on my fine cars is to install and retrofit PSC brass brackets and HiTech air hoses- an excellent combination that looks great and holds up well. I do not install air hoses on cars on which I retain the magnetic glad hands (see below). I am less likely to worry about air hoses when the other end details are also not up to standard, nor are they likely to be.

Editorial comment: Air hoses are part of an ensemble of details -coupler box, coupler shank, coupler head, etc.- such that if one detail is incorrect, poorly placed, over or undersized, no amount of effort with just one detail will make the ensemble look right. Over the years we ache, we belly ache, we criticise, we opine, we point out, and we argue about: ladder rung size, ladder rung spacing, brake wheel types and brands, hand rail brackets types and sizes, rivet sizes and counts (yes) and how many angels can stand on a rivet head; but we simply ignore, excuse, rationalize, get angry about, or gloss over any of the details below the end beams. We tolerate over-wide coupler boxes; we tolerate over long coupler shanks; we tolerate melon sized coupler heads, and we tolerate balloon-tired wheel treads. And no, installing scale couplers with long shanks, i.e. anything longer than "short", only makes things only worse: the small head accentuates the large box mouth ("a catfish tongue on the tip of which is a large pimple") by being no longer able to disguise this fact.

Magnetic glad hands as air hoses are a scale 4" thick! .

I am not above tolerating all of these things myself, and I have done so for many years; but I am through rationalizing that in this hobby prizing itself on scale prototype modeling, that it is "OK".

H-mmph.

Denny S. Anspach MD
Okoboji, IA


glimpses of freight cars and LOTS AND LOTS OF SCRAP

Schuyler Larrabee
 


Angle cock/air hose (was Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era cars ...)

Gene <bierglaeser@...>
 

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

Gene Green or Doug Harding ...

I just spent about 20 minutes searching both the FILES
and Pictures sections of this group and did not find
anything about UnderBody Detail(s). Please provide a
better pointer to where to find it. (Perhaps it is on
a different yahoo group?).
- Jim Betz
Sorry, Jim. I should have been more precise. Search in the files for Freight Car UnderbodyDetail.pdf.
Gene Green


Re: NMRA Photo Archives

water.kresse@...
 

Bill,



They are loosing money at that price . . . even with volunteers.   That barely covers the time to open the file and FTP it.  They want to get these images out for all to see it appears.



Al

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


From: "lnbill" <fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2013 9:07:24 PM
Subject: [STMFC] NMRA Photo Archives

I went poking around the on-line Photo Archives today and it appears there are some new collections. I noted in particular the "Eugene A. Ellis Collection, Box B" with many Georgia Railroad freight cars, including several different BC Red and Silver & Black USRA steel rebuilds, and steel rebuilds of their Pratt trussed cars. Some of these are at a low enough angle to see brake layout details.

Another collection has many builders photos of freight cars.

Neither the Harold "Dusty " Miller or Ernest Stefan appear to have been scanned thus far.

The Bob Charles Collection seems to have some glitches. This afternoon there was a wider range of reporting marks than when I looked again about 8:45 PM EDT. No SP or Southern for example tonite. Also not all of the images are showing within the collection. Very strange.

A couple of months ago I emailed Stephan Priest, whose company is responsible for this part of the website about the fact that most of the reporting marks were not showing up and it looks like there is still a problem so I will send another message.

600 DPI Tiffs can be ordered for $4.00 for nonmembers which is a very fair price I think.

Here is the link: http://archive.nmra.org/Collections.aspx

Enjoy!

Bill Welch


Re: Pennsylvania X31f brake rigging

Bruce Smith
 

Folks,

My apologies - the web server I use has been adding a S*P*A*M tag to everything from this list recently and I forgot to delete it :^(

Rob,
A number of years ago we did a project improving these cars in the PRRProjects group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PRRPro
With respect to the brakes, these cars were rebuilt from X31 cars, some of which still had KD brakes and it appears that the brakes on these cars were not converted to AB at that time. Obviously, they swapped were at a later date. The PRRPro files contain the KD drawing as well as the AB drawing both of which also show the underbody tubes that were part of the autoloaders. When converted to AB brakes, these cars were given a transverse reservoir.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, Al
________________________________________
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [STMFC@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of roblmclear [rob.mclear3@bigpond.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 11:31 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: { SPAM 2 }:[STMFC] Pennsylvania X31f brake rigging

Hello to all

I have recently picked up a couple of the Bowser kits and the simplified brake rigging in the kit is not up to my standards. Can anyone please advise how the brake rigging on this car was done. To me the reservoir looks to be in the wrong place transverse instead of lateral. Any help would be appreciated. I model 1947 before the stringers were changed and the diagonal bracing removed from the ends of the underframe.

Regards
Rob McLear
Kingaroy Australia.



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

Yahoo! Groups Links



http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: { SPAM 2 }: Pennsylvania X31f brake rigging

Bruce Smith
 

Rob,
A number of years ago we did a project improving these cars in the PRRProjects group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PRRPro

With respect to the brakes, these cars were rebuilt from X31 cars, some of which still had KD brakes and it appears that the brakes on these cars were not converted to AB at that time. Obviously, they swapped were at a later date. The PRRPro files contain the KD drawing as well as the AB drawing both of which also show the underbody tubes that were part of the autoloaders. When converted to AB brakes, these cars were given a transverse reservoir.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, Al
________________________________________
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [STMFC@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of roblmclear [rob.mclear3@bigpond.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 11:31 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: { SPAM 2 }:[STMFC] Pennsylvania X31f brake rigging

Hello to all

I have recently picked up a couple of the Bowser kits and the simplified brake rigging in the kit is not up to my standards. Can anyone please advise how the brake rigging on this car was done. To me the reservoir looks to be in the wrong place transverse instead of lateral. Any help would be appreciated. I model 1947 before the stringers were changed and the diagonal bracing removed from the ends of the underframe.

Regards
Rob McLear
Kingaroy Australia.



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

Yahoo! Groups Links



http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Pennsylvania X31f brake rigging

roblmclear <rob.mclear3@...>
 

Hello to all

I have recently picked up a couple of the Bowser kits and the simplified brake rigging in the kit is not up to my standards. Can anyone please advise how the brake rigging on this car was done. To me the reservoir looks to be in the wrong place transverse instead of lateral. Any help would be appreciated. I model 1947 before the stringers were changed and the diagonal bracing removed from the ends of the underframe.

Regards
Rob McLear
Kingaroy Australia.


S&A 1957 Roster Needed

John Degnan <Scaler164@...>
 

Looking for a 1957 roster covering ALL equipment on the Savannah And Atlanta Railway.

Thanks in advance.


John Degnan
Scaler164@comcast.net
Scaler187@comcast.net


Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era cars ...

 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote:

On Jun 1, 2013, at 11:27 AM, jimbetz <jimbetz@...> wrote:
Hi,

I see a fair number of models that the guy doing it has gone
to the trouble of painting the air hoses ... but, to my way of
thinking, has gotten the colors wrong �
[snip]

What do you do? And why, if it matters ... Jim Betz
Jim, the staging for my operating diorama requires the use of Kadee magnetic uncoupling, so my couplers all have operating levers, and I don't model separate air hoses so as to avoid visual clutter between the cars. I let the Kadee operating levers represent air hoses and I paint them grimy flat dark gray so they look like weathered rubber. I haven't made a practice of painting the ends to represent metal couplings, as I don't want to call attention to the fact that the "air hoses" aren't connected, but if I were going to do so, I'd use a rusty metal color, as you have. As usual, YMMV.

Richard Hendrickson




Here's some info on RR air brakes from NMRA:
http://www.nmra.org/member/sites/default/files/datasheets/Prototyp/D9o.PDF


Re: Spring Plank?

Charles Hostetler
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote:
Charles, you're correct that what you've marked in red is a spring plank, and you're also right that the truck has Barber Lateral Motion devices between the bolster and springs. In HO scale the Tahoe Modelk Works TMW 109/209s are the trucks you want.

Richard Hendrickson
Thank you Richard and Tom,

I revised the post by adding an additional image with green highlighting to indicate the location of the Lateral Motion device.

I must say, it is nice to be able to connect a visual to the description!

Regards,

Charles Hostetler


Re: Angle cock/air hose (was Re: Modeling air hoses on STMFC era cars ...)

Douglas Harding
 

Jim, "Freight Car Underbody Detail" is a pdf found in the group files.



Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org


Re: Spring Plank?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Jun 1, 2013, at 6:47 PM, Charles Hostetler <cnw1045@gmail.com> wrote:

Good Evening All,

I've posted a photo of a truck from a 50-ton gondola here:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2013/06/truck-identification.html

The first thing I am trying to find out is whether the part I have highlighted in red is a spring plank.

The second thing I am trying to find out is whether TMW 109/209 would be a reasonable modeling approach for this truck.

Or whether I am using the learning aids incorrectly :0

I'm working from Richard Hendrickson's truck handout and I am trying to train my eye to find the key spotting features, so I appreciate your guidance (and patience).

Charles, you're correct that what you've marked in red is a spring plank, and you're also right that the truck has Barber Lateral Motion devices between the bolster and springs. In HO scale the Tahoe Modelk Works TMW 109/209s are the trucks you want.

Richard Hendrickson


Spring Plank?

Charles Hostetler
 

Good Evening All,

I've posted a photo of a truck from a 50-ton gondola here:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2013/06/truck-identification.html

The first thing I am trying to find out is whether the part I have highlighted in red is a spring plank.

The second thing I am trying to find out is whether TMW 109/209 would be a reasonable modeling approach for this truck.

Or whether I am using the learning aids incorrectly :0

I'm working from Richard Hendrickson's truck handout and I am trying to train my eye to find the key spotting features, so I appreciate your guidance (and patience).

Regards,

Charles Hostetler


Re: Freight Car Measurements

Charles Hostetler
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Hostetler" <cnw1045@...> wrote:
> I found in order to get things working correctly you need more than just info from the ORER. I think you also need a photograph you can work with, a knowledge of some standard car building practices, an idea of what materials you are going to work with, and some details about the coupler box you will be mounting. I found this an extremely interesting process and am preparing a blog post about it which I will share shortly when its finished.

Good Evening All,

I've made a table of contents page for my EJE gondola building adventure. As I continue to make progress, I'll update this page:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2013/05/scratchbuilding-ej-gondola.html

The process of making the drawings for the sides is described in the two posts currently listed under item 2 (The Sides) for those interested.

Thanks to Andy Laurent for the waybill scan, Frank Peacock for the photo, and Richard Hendrickson for the original article on the EJ&E gons and the help getting me started.

Regards,

Charles Hostetler

76201 - 76220 of 192624