Date   

Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

arved_grass
 

Well, gleaning what I can from the preview of GNRHS Reference Sheet No 6, I see the first of those cars came in 1955. That's a bit too new for my "Steam/Diesel Transition Era roster" date of 1953. I might consider it for a later era roster, but I'm trying to concentrate my modeling efforts on that "Steam/Diesel Transition Era roster."

Thanks. I think I'll just go for the Accurail #106 "40' Steel Boxcar Underframe with details" for this '48 RI PS-1 project.

I appreciate all the help you've offered - I can't thank you enough!
 
------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


From: "Arved Grass arved_grass@... [STMFC]"
To: "STMFC@..."
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 12:05 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

 
Thanks Ben. That's a lot of help.
 
------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


From: "Benjamin Hom b.hom@... [STMFC]"
To: "STMFC@..."
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 11:44 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

 
Arved Grass asked:
"The 3600 series? What would the prototypes for that be?"
http://www.accurail.com/accurail/3600.htm

The McKean and Accurail double door boxcars are a cross between GN 3000-3499 and GN 3500-3999. They have the roof and sidesills of 3000-3499, but the doors are closer to those on the 3500-3999 series cars and the model lacks the diagonal rivet rows in the panels next to the doors of the 3000-3499 series cars.  However, 3500-3999 have a ZU "overhanging" eave roof and a straight side sill, which these kits do not have.
http://www.gnrhs.org/store/avactis-images/RS66.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/gn/gn-xm3582ajs.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/gn/gn-b3975.jpg

See GNRHS Reference Sheet No 66 for more information.
http://www.gnrhs.org/store/product-info-mbr.php?pid126.html

Additionally, Staffan Ehnbom did an article on upgrading the car in Mainline Modeler, but I can't find the reference at the moment. (Hundman had a nasty habit of giving articles generic names such as "GN boxcar", making it difficult to differentiate them in indexes.)  Hopefully Staffan will chime in with the reference.

"If not the 3600 series cars, the Accurail #106 "40' Steel Boxcar Underframe with details" would be the correct underframe?"

Accurail uses the #106 underframe for both the 40 ft double door boxcar and their 40 ft postwar AAR boxcar.  It would be a much better starting point for the early PS-1 underframe and much better than trying to use the McKean underframe that comes with their PS-1, which is actually correct for the GN cars above.

Ben Hom





Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

arved_grass
 

Thanks Ben. That's a lot of help.
 
------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


From: "Benjamin Hom b.hom@... [STMFC]"
To: "STMFC@..."
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 11:44 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

 
Arved Grass asked:
"The 3600 series? What would the prototypes for that be?"
http://www.accurail.com/accurail/3600.htm

The McKean and Accurail double door boxcars are a cross between GN 3000-3499 and GN 3500-3999. They have the roof and sidesills of 3000-3499, but the doors are closer to those on the 3500-3999 series cars and the model lacks the diagonal rivet rows in the panels next to the doors of the 3000-3499 series cars.  However, 3500-3999 have a ZU "overhanging" eave roof and a straight side sill, which these kits do not have.
http://www.gnrhs.org/store/avactis-images/RS66.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/gn/gn-xm3582ajs.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/gn/gn-b3975.jpg

See GNRHS Reference Sheet No 66 for more information.
http://www.gnrhs.org/store/product-info-mbr.php?pid126.html

Additionally, Staffan Ehnbom did an article on upgrading the car in Mainline Modeler, but I can't find the reference at the moment. (Hundman had a nasty habit of giving articles generic names such as "GN boxcar", making it difficult to differentiate them in indexes.)  Hopefully Staffan will chime in with the reference.

"If not the 3600 series cars, the Accurail #106 "40' Steel Boxcar Underframe with details" would be the correct underframe?"

Accurail uses the #106 underframe for both the 40 ft double door boxcar and their 40 ft postwar AAR boxcar.  It would be a much better starting point for the early PS-1 underframe and much better than trying to use the McKean underframe that comes with their PS-1, which is actually correct for the GN cars above.

Ben Hom



Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

Benjamin Hom
 

Arved Grass asked:
"The 3600 series? What would the prototypes for that be?"
http://www.accurail.com/accurail/3600.htm

The McKean and Accurail double door boxcars are a cross between GN 3000-3499 and GN 3500-3999. They have the roof and sidesills of 3000-3499, but the doors are closer to those on the 3500-3999 series cars and the model lacks the diagonal rivet rows in the panels next to the doors of the 3000-3499 series cars.  However, 3500-3999 have a ZU "overhanging" eave roof and a straight side sill, which these kits do not have.
http://www.gnrhs.org/store/avactis-images/RS66.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/gn/gn-xm3582ajs.jpg
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/gn/gn-b3975.jpg

See GNRHS Reference Sheet No 66 for more information.
http://www.gnrhs.org/store/product-info-mbr.php?pid126.html

Additionally, Staffan Ehnbom did an article on upgrading the car in Mainline Modeler, but I can't find the reference at the moment. (Hundman had a nasty habit of giving articles generic names such as "GN boxcar", making it difficult to differentiate them in indexes.)  Hopefully Staffan will chime in with the reference.


"If not the 3600 series cars, the Accurail #106 "40' Steel Boxcar Underframe with details" would be the correct underframe?"

Accurail uses the #106 underframe for both the 40 ft double door boxcar and their 40 ft postwar AAR boxcar.  It would be a much better starting point for the early PS-1 underframe and much better than trying to use the McKean underframe that comes with their PS-1, which is actually correct for the GN cars above.




Ben Hom


Re: Tank Car numbers

Richard Townsend
 

January 1938
General American             no numbers given
North American (NATX)    no numbers given
Shippers Car Line             4,347
Sinclair Oil (SDRX)            6,485
Texaco (TCX)                     no numbers given
Pure Oil (POX)                     not listed
Shell (PRX, SCCX)             3,307
 
January 1943
General American                27,867
North American                     4,459
Shippers Car Line                6,949
Sinclair Oil                             6,447
Texaco (TCX)                         3,901
Pure Oil (POX)                     not listed
Shell (PRX, SCCX)             3,793
 
 
Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, Oregon


Re: CAD library (Some thoughts)

Tim O'Connor
 

It was the US government that funded, and created most of the key
standards that govern the network layer of the Internet. The standards
function was stewarded for a time by keepers of the flame, before the
IETF standards body took over.

Anyway there is a HUGE difference between STANDARDS and DESIGNS. I can
imagine a Shapeways "standard" that encompasses CAD software conventions,
notations, required levels of resolution, accuracy, etc.

But once someone invests a hundred or a thousand hours of their time in
a project, are they just going to give that away? I guess they could (an
example would be Linux which has thousands of unpaid contributors) but it
seems unlikely to amount to much.

So I think CAD library Standards are a good idea. Free sharing of designed
parts? Not so much.

For models, a good standard might be to design a single way to attach the
end of a steel box car to the body (sides and roof and floor) -- perhaps the
standard would include variations for different car heights.

This way I could buy ends, sides, roof and floor that all conformed to the
standard, and build myself a freight car out of parts from several designers
(or vendors)

Tim O'Connor

I'll try not to vent, but I'd rather not have the NMRA involved. Otherwise, you could expect everything in HO scale to end up S scaled, such as the NMRA coupler pocket spec (RP-22). I prefer the prototype to be my standard, rather than some arbitrary rules that impede progress.

While DCC should be standardized, the correct standards body should be the IEEE, and not the NMRA. The NMRA completely overstepped it's bounds assuming an electrical standard. Where would DCC be without the NMRA? Under the IEEE, my best guess would be that we'd already have "The Internet of Everything" with full IP addresses instead of a hodgepodge of 2 and 4 digit addressing, and numerous other advantages.

I would hate to see the crippling effect of NMRA standards and recommended practices on what could and should be a major leap forward for the model builder. If there is a standards body that should be involved, I would suggest the International Plastic Modelers Association. The technology has a lot more market share to the entirety of plastic model building, than just steam era freight car modelers.

Let's learn from our mistakes and keep the NMRA out of it.

------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


Re: HO Intermountain Alt. Std. 2 bay hopper and other kits

Mikebrock
 

Mike Del Vecchio responds to Andy Carlson's cars for sale via the STMFC.


"Hi Andy
One of the undec alt. Std. Hoppers, please via PayPal, please?"

No, no, Mike. As Andy says...replies are to be OFF GROUP. In this case:

midcentury@sbcglobal.net

Thanks,
Mike Brock
STMFC Owner


Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

arved_grass
 

The 3600 series? What would the prototypes for that be?

Just bought a pair of undec McKean 40' PS-1s w/ 6' doors off eBay.

If not the 3600 series cars, the Accurail #106 "40' Steel Boxcar Underframe with details" would be the correct underframe?

Thanks a lot!

------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


________________________________
From: "Benjamin Hom b.hom@att.net [STMFC]" <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
To: "STMFC@yahoogroups.com" <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars




Tim O'Connor wrote:
"The old McKean kit has the correct roof and ends (if you remove the small stampings at the top of the end). And the pre-1950 box cars did not have the classic PS-1 underframe -- That design was introduced in 1950."

BTW, the McKean underframe isn't correct for any PS-1 - McKean reused the underframe from their GN double-door boxcar.  You could do a one-for-one swap with an Accurail double-door boxcar and knock out two birds with one stone!

Ben Hom


Re: CAD library (Some thoughts)

arved_grass
 

I'll try not to vent, but I'd rather not have the NMRA involved. Otherwise, you could expect everything in HO scale to end up S scaled, such as the NMRA coupler pocket spec (RP-22). I prefer the prototype to be my standard, rather than some arbitrary rules that impede progress.

While DCC should be standardized, the correct standards body should be the IEEE, and not the NMRA. The NMRA completely overstepped it's bounds assuming an electrical standard. Where would DCC be without the NMRA? Under the IEEE, my best guess would be that we'd already have "The Internet of Everything" with full IP addresses instead of a hodgepodge of 2 and 4 digit addressing, and numerous other advantages.

I would hate to see the crippling effect of NMRA standards and recommended practices on what could and should be a major leap forward for the model builder. If there is a standards body that should be involved, I would suggest the International Plastic Modelers Association. The technology has a lot more market share to the entirety of plastic model building, than just steam era freight car modelers.

Let's learn from our mistakes and keep the NMRA out of it.
 
------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


From: "Rod Miller rod@... [STMFC]"
To: STMFC@...
Cc: pres@...
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] CAD library (Some thoughts)

I wonder if standards and RPs on this would be appropriate
for the NMRA to address. Consider where DCC might be if it
were not standardized.

NMRA haters please refrain from venting.

I asked Charlie Getz, NMRA President, if the NMRA would be
interested in this as a project. His response was yes but
it won't work if no one volunteers to help. So if there is
consensus that this warrants consideration, are any of you
interested in volunteering? If so, please let Charlie know
at: pres at hq d o t nmra dot o r g

Thx

Rod



On 8/14/14, 8:37 PM, Richard Brennan brennan8@... [STMFC] wrote:
> At 06:38 AM 8/14/2014, 'Al and Patricia
> Westerfield' westerfieldalfred@... [S wrote:
>> Has anyone considered setting standards for
>> model railroad rapid prototyping?  Here are some thoughts on the subject.
>
> Way overdue! Ok - Some thoughts:
>
>>  Select a simple CAD program for use of everyone on the list.
>
> Noooooo!!!  We do NOT need to select the CAD
> program... only the exchangeable file type(s).
> Possible choice would be a "mesh" file format; like  .STL, .PLY, or .OBJ.
>
>> Establish a library of designs that can be
>> plugged into different prototypes – example:
>> reefer door hinges, rivets, scribing.
>
> e.g. As a start; all the stuff in the GrandtLine,
> PSC and similar parts catalogs.
> However... with unlimited variation
> possible,  the constraints imposed by 'close but not quite' parts go away.
>
> How about metadata?  Maybe in an XML format...
> with source information: measured in the field
> from car No. xxxxxx; scaled from photo; derived from plans; etc...
>
> In my dreams, GrandtLine would someday accept
> bulk orders as STEP-files for CNC-cutting molds for styrene parts on-demand...
> and PSC would offer 3D-to-Wax-to-Brass
> printing+investment casting services over the web.  <>
>
>> Set up a system of free and for-profit downloads.
>
> Free: Certainly!
> For-profit: I doubt it...
>    AFAIK there is no DRM (Digital Rights
> Management) capability on anything so intrinsically 'editable'
>    Additionally, if I modify the file to decrease
> the head size on one rivet... now is it MY design... or Yours?
>
>> Establish standards for quality and material with perhaps qualified vendors.
>> Establish standards for thicknesses of major parts so kitbashing is simpler.
>
> ..because our Hobby has such a good track record
> in setting relevant standards, updating, and enforcing them????
> This really a downstream production issue... You
> tend to get what you pay for, and technology
> progress keeps the value increasing.
>
>> Sell downloads for major parts such as roofs and ends.
>
> Well.. People do sell public domain stuff all the time;
> So I guess selling canned designs is possible,
> even if they are readily available elsewhere.
> The user value found in the design is
> small...  the value of a perfect part out the end of the process is large.
>
> Can we foresee the day of the local 'Starbucks 3D print Bureau'...
> "Would you like a Vente Latte while that Deco End prints?..."
>
>>  There are so many opportunities here I‘ve
>> only scratched the surface.  Anyone want to add some ideas? – Al Westerfield
>
> Al...
> I believe it's ALL YOUR fault (...at least partially),
> For leading us onto that long, steep, slippery slope of:
> W-A-N-T  M-O-R-E  A-C-C-U-R-A-T-E  M-O-D-E-LS !!!
>
> Thanks!
>
> --------------------
> Richard Brennan - San Leandro CA
> --------------------
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
> Posted by: Richard Brennan <brennan8@...
>
> ------------------------------------

--
Rod Miller
Handcraftsman
===
Custom 2-rail O Scale Models: Drives,  |  O Scale West / S West
Repairs, Steam Loco Building, More    |  2015 Meet is Feb 5 - 7
http://www.rodmiller.com               |  http://www.oscalewest.com


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

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


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

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    STMFC-digest@...
    STMFC-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    STMFC-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
    https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/





Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

arved_grass
 

Oh horse manure! I forgot to sign the post with my full name. My apologies Mr. Brock and all the fine moderators ready to chastise me and send me to moderator jail.

While I'm at it, thanks to all who chimed in on this thread, and especially to Ed Hawkins who detailed all the work I'll need to do.

The other small detail is this order of RI PS-1s had conspicuity dots along the sill. These are not included in any of the potential Mark Island decals (i.e. with and without the black background "Beaver Pelt" logo). I may be a whole lot better off just going with a 1937 AAR and one of the 1951 built PS-1s, although I was hoping for something a little more pedestrian than the "100 years of Progress" logo. A bit overdone in the R-T-R realm, if you ask me.
 
------------------------
Arved Grass
Fleming Island, Florida


From: "arved_grass@... [STMFC]"
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 5:40 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

 
Thanks, Fenton. I ordered a copy just 2 days ago.- Arved
---In STMFC@...,
Arved, there is a good article in the First volume of Railway Prototype Cyclopedia by Pat Wilder and Ed Hawkins that covers 3 of the early PS-1's C&NW, DSS & A and FCP railroads.  I built one C&NW from 1948 and one from 1949 and they are interesting cars.  The differences are subtle but are well covered in the article.
-- Fenton Wells5 Newberry Lane
Pinehurst NC 28374910-420-1144srrfan1401@...



HO Intermountain Alt. Std. 2 bay hopper and other kits

MDelvec952
 


Hi Andy,

One of the undec alt. Std. Hoppers, please via PayPal, please?

Many thanks. 

Mike Del Vecchio
6 Victory Court
Dover, NJ  07801

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: "Andy Carlson midcentury@... [STMFC]"
Date:08/15/2014 12:57 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Steam Era
Subject: [STMFC] HO Intermountain Alt. Std. 2 bay hopper and other kits

 

Hello-

I was informed by Bill (from Intermountain) on Tuesday that there was a recently discovered cache of HO kits available. Large #s of the '37 AAR box cars and lessor amounts of the 10'6" 5/5 EDE AAR box cars.  I got them all. I quickly sold out the #40799 '37 AAR kits. I have the following still available:

4 Intermountain #40899 10'6" IH AAR box car undec HO kits ............$16/each
6 IntMt  #42199 Alternate standard 2 bay hopper undec HO kit  ........$21/each
2 IntMt  #43499 ART steel refrigerator undec HO kit  ..........................$16/each
1 IntMt  #43700 AAR 70 ton flat car undec HO kit  ..............................$16
1 IntMt  #43799 70 Ton Bulkhead flat car unde c HO kit  ......................$16
2 IntMt  #43698 1958 cu ft covered hopper closed side HO Kit  .........$16/each

Shipping is $3.50/car.  I accept checks and money orders. For a small fee, I can accept PayPal. Please contact me OFF-LIST @  <midcentury@...> if interested.
Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA


Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

arved_grass
 

Thanks, Fenton. I ordered a copy just 2 days ago.- Arved
---In STMFC@..., <srrfan1401@...> wrote :
Arved, there is a good article in the First volume of Railway Prototype Cyclopedia by Pat Wilder and Ed Hawkins that covers 3 of the early PS-1's C&NW, DSS & A and FCP railroads.  I built one C&NW from 1948 and one from 1949 and they are interesting cars.  The differences are subtle but are well covered in the article.
-- Fenton Wells5 Newberry Lane
Pinehurst NC 28374910-420-1144srrfan1401@...


Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

Tim O'Connor
 

Ben

lol, yeah that's a good suggestion.

The Kadee and Intermountain underframes are also only correct for
some but not all of their models because of the different sizes of
doors they offer -- You have to move the crossbearers on some cars
to be more correct. Of course Intermountain only offers the 1953 to
1960 (?) version. Kadee also has 1950-1953, and post 1960 versions.
(But nobody here cares about those right?)

Tim O'

"The old McKean kit has the correct roof and ends (if you remove the small stampings at the top of the end). And the pre-1950 box cars did not have the classic PS-1 underframe -- That design was introduced in 1950."

BTW, the McKean underframe isn't correct for any PS-1 - McKean reused the underframe from their GN double-door boxcar. You could do a one-for-one swap with an Accurail double-door boxcar and knock out two birds with one stone!

Ben Hom


Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

Benjamin Hom
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
"The old McKean kit has the correct roof and ends (if you remove the small stampings at the top of the end). And the pre-1950 box cars did not have the classic PS-1 underframe -- That design was introduced in 1950."

BTW, the McKean underframe isn't correct for any PS-1 - McKean reused the underframe from their GN double-door boxcar.  You could do a one-for-one swap with an Accurail double-door boxcar and knock out two birds with one stone!


Ben Hom


Re: Tank Car numbers

Eric Neubauer <eaneubauer@...>
 

Let's go for 7-34; 10-39, 7-46, 4-51 respectively:

General American (would include GATX and other reporting marks) n/a;n/a;38012;42239
North American (NATX) n/a;n/a;;4614;4572
Shippers Car Line (SHPX and others) 2965;n/a;8283;10129
Sinclair Oil (SDRX) 6582;6445;6294;5005
Texaco (TCX) (absorbed into General American in the 30’s) 6331;n/a;n/a;n/a
Pure Oil (POX) (absorbed into UTLX in 1933) 1461;n/a;n/a;n/a
Shell (PRX, SCCX) (partially absorbed, 50’s?)
    570 SEPX, 537 SCCX, 15 SCBX, 2788 RPX;
    68 SCMX, 540 SCCX, 17 SCBX, 49 SCAX, 2754 RPX, 561 SEPX;
    17 SCBX, 185 SCMX, 54 SCAX, 518 SCCX, 2256 RPX;
    388 SCMX, 68 SCAX, 582 SCCX


Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

Tim O'Connor
 

The old McKean kit has the correct roof and ends (if you remove the small
stampings at the top of the end). And the pre-1950 box cars did not have the
classic PS-1 underframe -- That design was introduced in 1950.

Tim O'

Mont Switzer did an article in Mainline Modeler August 2004 detailing the
kitbashing of a Mississippi Central 12 panel early PS-1. If you can obtain
a copy of that article I think you will have a good start to your RI PS-1.
Also see Ted Culottes article Essential Freight Cars 40 Early PS-1's RMC Jan 08 P94

The early PS-1's had what I call a 10-2 panel roof the end panels didn't have
the raised panels, the end ladders were straight, they didn't have the raised
tabs under the running boards on the ends, the grabs on the end were across
the lower two ribs, the side tabs were different. the two end panels were
riveted not welded etc.

Your best bet is to start with an Intermountain undec PS-1 kit.

There was a very good article in one of the train magazines detailing an early
PS-1 but at this moment I can't find it. AS soon as I do I will forward the info.

Al Smith


Tank Car numbers

Steve and Barb Hile
 

I am trying to put together a simple comparison chart for UTLX and other major tank car owners.  I have a Westerfield 1930 ORER disk and the 1953 NMRA ORER reprint, but only have UTLX pages from other years.  I would appreciate it if could have the gross number of tank cars in other years between, say 1920 and 1950 for

 

General American (would include GATX and other reporting marks)

North American (NATX)

Shippers Car Line (SHPX and others)

Sinclair Oil (SDRX)

Texaco (TCX) (absorbed into General American in the 30’s)

Pure Oil (POX) (absorbed into UTLX in 1933)

Shell (PRX, SCCX) (partially absorbed, 50’s?)

 

The date and bottom line total of tank equipment is all I am looking for.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Steve Hile


Re: CAD library (Some thoughts)

Rod Miller
 

I wonder if standards and RPs on this would be appropriate
for the NMRA to address. Consider where DCC might be if it
were not standardized.

NMRA haters please refrain from venting.

I asked Charlie Getz, NMRA President, if the NMRA would be
interested in this as a project. His response was yes but
it won't work if no one volunteers to help. So if there is
consensus that this warrants consideration, are any of you
interested in volunteering? If so, please let Charlie know
at: pres at hq d o t nmra dot o r g

Thx

Rod

On 8/14/14, 8:37 PM, Richard Brennan brennan8@earthlink.net [STMFC] wrote:
At 06:38 AM 8/14/2014, 'Al and Patricia
Westerfield' westerfieldalfred@frontier.com [S wrote:
Has anyone considered setting standards for
model railroad rapid prototyping? Here are some thoughts on the subject.
Way overdue! Ok - Some thoughts:

Select a simple CAD program for use of everyone on the list.
Noooooo!!! We do NOT need to select the CAD
program... only the exchangeable file type(s).
Possible choice would be a "mesh" file format; like .STL, .PLY, or .OBJ.

Establish a library of designs that can be
plugged into different prototypes � example:
reefer door hinges, rivets, scribing.
e.g. As a start; all the stuff in the GrandtLine,
PSC and similar parts catalogs.
However... with unlimited variation
possible, the constraints imposed by 'close but not quite' parts go away.

How about metadata? Maybe in an XML format...
with source information: measured in the field
from car No. xxxxxx; scaled from photo; derived from plans; etc...

In my dreams, GrandtLine would someday accept
bulk orders as STEP-files for CNC-cutting molds for styrene parts on-demand...
and PSC would offer 3D-to-Wax-to-Brass
printing+investment casting services over the web. <<sigh>>

Set up a system of free and for-profit downloads.
Free: Certainly!
For-profit: I doubt it...
AFAIK there is no DRM (Digital Rights
Management) capability on anything so intrinsically 'editable'
Additionally, if I modify the file to decrease
the head size on one rivet... now is it MY design... or Yours?

Establish standards for quality and material with perhaps qualified vendors.
Establish standards for thicknesses of major parts so kitbashing is simpler.
..because our Hobby has such a good track record
in setting relevant standards, updating, and enforcing them????
This really a downstream production issue... You
tend to get what you pay for, and technology
progress keeps the value increasing.

Sell downloads for major parts such as roofs and ends.
Well.. People do sell public domain stuff all the time;
So I guess selling canned designs is possible,
even if they are readily available elsewhere.
The user value found in the design is
small... the value of a perfect part out the end of the process is large.

Can we foresee the day of the local 'Starbucks 3D print Bureau'...
"Would you like a Vente Latte while that Deco End prints?..."

There are so many opportunities here I‘ve
only scratched the surface. Anyone want to add some ideas? � Al Westerfield
Al...
I believe it's ALL YOUR fault (...at least partially),
For leading us onto that long, steep, slippery slope of:
W-A-N-T M-O-R-E A-C-C-U-R-A-T-E M-O-D-E-LS !!!

Thanks!

--------------------
Richard Brennan - San Leandro CA
--------------------



------------------------------------
Posted by: Richard Brennan <brennan8@earthlink.net>
------------------------------------
--
Rod Miller
Handcraftsman
===
Custom 2-rail O Scale Models: Drives, | O Scale West / S West
Repairs, Steam Loco Building, More | 2015 Meet is Feb 5 - 7
http://www.rodmiller.com | http://www.oscalewest.com


Re: Early 40' PS-1 Box Cars

Allan Smith
 

Mont Switzer did an article in Mainline Modeler August 2004 detailing the kitbashing of a Mississippi Central 12 panel early PS-1. If you can obtain a copy of that article I think you will have a good start to your RI PS-1. Also see Ted Culottes article Essential Freight Cars 40 Early PS-1's RMC Jan 08 P94

The early PS-1's had what I call a 10-2 panel roof the end panels didn't have the raised panels, the end ladders were straight, they didn't have the raised tabs under the running boards on the ends, the grabs on the end were across the lower two ribs, the side tabs were different. the two end panels were rivetted not welded etc.

Your best bet is to start with an Intermountain undec PS-1 kit.

There was a very good article in one of the train magazines detailing an early PS-1 but at this moment I can't find it. AS soon as I do I will forward the info.
Al Smith


Re: Tulsa Oil Refiners

FRANK PEACOCK
 

Joel,  The short answer is that fuels, via tank car, could have come from Sinclair, Wyo. or Houston or Corpus Christi.  Sinclair, Wyo.  seems to be the most direct route.  However, the 1949 Moodys states that Sinclair products were sold in 43 states.  The Pacific Coast and "adjacent states"were not served.  Also,  "A Great Name in Oil"(1966) does not show any product pipelines going to the left coast.  One was completed to SLC in 1953.  I don't know when Sinclair began marketing on the left coast, but I bet it was after the time of this list. FHP (Frank H. Peacock) 


To: STMFC@...
From: STMFC@...
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 07:00:38 -0700
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Tulsa Oil Refiners

 

I noticed Sinclair on the list.  I lived in SoCal and remember Sinclair Service Stations as a kid.  As they were not part of the pipeline between El Segundo and Martinez, would they have supplied their fuel products from Texas or Wyoming?
thank you, joel dee



HO Intermountain Alt. Std. 2 bay hopper and other kits

Andy Carlson
 

Hello-

I was informed by Bill (from Intermountain) on Tuesday that there was a recently discovered cache of HO kits available. Large #s of the '37 AAR box cars and lessor amounts of the 10'6" 5/5 EDE AAR box cars.  I got them all. I quickly sold out the #40799 '37 AAR kits. I have the following still available:

4 Intermountain #40899 10'6" IH AAR box car undec HO kits ............$16/each
6 IntMt  #42199 Alternate standard 2 bay hopper undec HO kit  ........$21/each
2 IntMt  #43499 ART steel refrigerator undec HO kit  ..........................$16/each
1 IntMt  #43700 AAR 70 ton flat car undec HO kit  ..............................$16
1 IntMt  #43799 70 Ton Bulkhead flat car undec HO kit  ......................$16
2 IntMt  #43698 1958 cu ft covered hopper closed side HO Kit  .........$16/each

Shipping is $3.50/car.  I accept checks and money orders. For a small fee, I can accept PayPal. Please contact me OFF-LIST @  if interested.
Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

57301 - 57320 of 184228