Date   

Re: Greetings, a new guy.

Steve SANDIFER
 

In 1952 there would be a lot of single sheathed and double sheathed cars around. Most modelers of that time slot have too many all steel cars.  

 

Now your replied will start getting technical with details of steel underframes, steel ends vs. wood ends, truss rods, etc.  I'm going to lunch.

 

__________________________________________________

J. Stephen Sandifer

Minister Emeritus, Southwest Central Church of Christ

Webmaster, Santa Fe Railway Historical and Modeling Society

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 12:00 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Greetings, a new guy.

 

 

I'm a so-so modeler that is falling into lower cost modeling due to the economy.

I have a question about all-wood boxcars.

I remember seeing a couple of the older outside braced wooden boxcars on the side of the Milwaukee Road main shops for several years starting around 1970. So some wood cars survived years beyond the years this group is following.

My question is about when did the older all-wood boxcars get pulled off of the mainline?

I'd like to photo-real model several of the older all-wood boxcars in higher-tech card-stock, of sorts. I understand many of the surviving in service wood box cars would have metal ends and up to date metal under-frames.

I'm puzzled about when all wood body boxcars would be forced off of the Roads.

I'm unsure if circa 1952, wooden sided boxcars would still be somewhat common.

Does anyone have knowledge of mandated elimination dates for the all-wood box car bodies, or the wooden sided-only boxcars ?

Best to ya,
Mike Bauers
Milwaukee, Wi


Greetings, a new guy.

mwbauers
 

I'm a so-so modeler that is falling into lower cost modeling due to the economy.

I have a question about all-wood boxcars.

I remember seeing a couple of the older outside braced wooden boxcars on the side of the Milwaukee Road main shops for several years starting around 1970. So some wood cars survived years beyond the years this group is following.

My question is about when did the older all-wood boxcars get pulled off of the mainline?

I'd like to photo-real model several of the older all-wood boxcars in higher-tech card-stock, of sorts. I understand many of the surviving in service wood box cars would have metal ends and up to date metal under-frames.

I'm puzzled about when all wood body boxcars would be forced off of the Roads.

I'm unsure if circa 1952, wooden sided boxcars would still be somewhat common.

Does anyone have knowledge of mandated elimination dates for the all-wood box car bodies, or the wooden sided-only boxcars ?

Best to ya,
Mike Bauers
Milwaukee, Wi


Freight Car Terminology, diversion into track terminology

Jack Mullen
 

Paul Hillman said: 

Wonder what they were called when they were stub-type? (No points)

Same definitions apply: the part with movable rails is a switch. In this case it's a stub switch.  The whole thing, extending to or past the heel of frog, is a turnout.If you need to differentiate it from turnouts having other types of switches, you can call it a stub-switch turnout. 

The familiar type of switch having two tapered point rails is a split switch, but the term is usually used only when needed to distinguish from other types.

Jack Mullen



Re: Odd or Even Numbers Only for Rolling Stock?

reporterllc
 

Thanks Dennis. I note that on the Fort Wayne, Jackson & Saginaw and its successor the Fort Wayne & Jackson Railroad (the subject of my new book out this year) that platform cars and flat cars were even numbered only and all other cars including "mileage" box cars used in the lumber trade were even numbered.


My next question probably applies to a period much earlier than most of the interests of this group, but am I correct in that "platform cars"  were flats  that could be converted to hauling bulk commodities with the addition of stakes and side boards?


The Fort Wayne & Jackson became a "paper railroad" in 1882, leased over time to the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern, New York Central and Penn Central. My book covers the time period from 1869 to present day.


If anyone knows of a source for photos of FWJ&S or FW&J freight or passenger cars, please let me know.


Victor A. Baird

http://www.erstwhilepublications.com




Re: [IllinoisCentral] IC 38400-38799 Composite Boxcars

Ray Breyer
 

Hi Jeff,
 
The cars were originally built in 7/1929 as 165000-165599, with 10' wide Youngstown doors (6' and 4'). They were changed to two 6' doors  VERY soon thereafter; the diagram book sheets say 2/1930. That's why the diagram PAGE shows a door and a half configuration.
 
By 1954, these cars were all over the map: 6' doors, 12' doors, 6' with the other door sealed, etc.
 
I'll send you a couple of photos off-group.
 
Ray Breyer
Elgin, IL


From: "Jeffrey White jrwhite@... [illinoiscentral]"
To: illinois-central-model@...; illinoiscentral@...; "STMFC@..."
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 10:16 AM
Subject: [IllinoisCentral] IC 38400-38799 Composite Boxcars

Does anyone have a photo of these cars or know the actual door
configuration?

The car diagram for these cars states that the cars have 12 foot doors.
However the illustration shows a door and a half configuration.  I
suppose it's possible it was an 8 foot and 4 foot door, but I've never
seen that configuration before.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Jeff White
Alma, IL


------------------------------------
Posted by: Jeffrey White <jrwhite@...>
------------------------------------

--
Please Join the Illinois Central Railroad Heritage Association( http://www.icrha.org/ ).
Courtesy and Efficient Service always! 
--
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

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

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

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

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




2015 Central Ohio RPM

seaboard_1966
 

The 2015 Central Ohio RPM is planned for April 23rd-25th at Marion Union Station, Marion, Ohio.


This meet follows the usual RPM practices of model displays, clinics, door prizes and fellowship.  Where we differ is that we hold the meet in a former Depot that is located within the intersection of 3 sets of double track mainlines.  2 of these sets are CSX while 1 is NS.


We have movie/slide shows each night of the meet and a meet closing cookout that is a GREAT time.


The festivities start on Thursday the 23rd around noon or so.  This is when be being setup.  After set up there is time for fanning in the area and then we gather for dinner at The Shovel, a local restaurant that is conveniently located right across the parking lot from the Marion Union Station.


After the dinner we will gather for our first of three slide/movie shows.


The fun really kicks off at 900AM on Friday and goes until 500PM when will adjourn for dinner.  They are plenty of choices within the local area  Around 7 or so we will gather for slides/movies again.


We have the same schedule on Saturday with door prizes being taken care of after lunch, around 1PM or so.  You must be present to claim your door prize. 


After the meet closes, around 5 pm or so, we have a tear down and cleanup session followed by an extra fare, $6.00, cookout.  Once the cookout out is complete we will have the last of our 3 slide/movie shows.  If you have movies/slides that you would like to share, please feel free to bring them along. We do have a digital projector and a lap top available for those that wish to present a digital presentation.


We are also looking for folks to present clinics.  Again, as I mentioned above, we do have the equipment for a digital presentation and actually prefer that they are presented digitally.  Clinicians get free admission to the meet.


Admission if $20.00 for the weekend and all proceeds, after expenses, go to the Marion Union Station Association. You can simply show up and The Warden, my wife, Robin Blake, will be able to handle registration at the door.


Please contact me, Denis Blake at dblake7@... for any more information. 


We hope to see you there.


Denis, Robin, JP and Kevin.


IC 38400-38799 Composite Boxcars

Jeffrey White
 

Does anyone have a photo of these cars or know the actual door configuration?

The car diagram for these cars states that the cars have 12 foot doors. However the illustration shows a door and a half configuration. I suppose it's possible it was an 8 foot and 4 foot door, but I've never seen that configuration before.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Jeff White
Alma, IL


Re: Odd or Even Numbers Only for Rolling Stock?

Dennis Storzek
 

It was an easy to check for misplaced cars. As an example, the Soo Line, which used the odd/even system for a good portion of the twentieth century, had two main businesses; grain, and iron ore. Boxcars were numbered with even numbers only, open top cars with odd numbers. If there was an even number in a track list of the ore yard, it was a good bet something was out of place.

Dennis Storzek


Odd or Even Numbers Only for Rolling Stock?

reporterllc
 

Why did some railroads number their cars (or some of them) in odd or even numbers only? What was the logic behind that?


Victor A. Baird

http://www.erstwhilepublications.com


Re: ADMIN: Freight Car Terminology

Mikebrock
 

Schuyler Larrabee says in response to my:

"And, we aren't too far from arguing about the [ OHMYGOSH! ] lack of a defined distance from the point of a frog to the point [ or even the dreaded 1/2" ] where the closure rail becomes a wing rail..."

Note that I said we were not far from...

Rest assured that I won't need to change the subject line because we won't be discussing the infamous missing measurement here.

And, for those who have attempted to name every stream locomotive ever built, the thread on steam loco names is now TERMINATED. BTW, I was only pointing out in my comment regarding UP 4-8-4's that the names of certain RR subjects might differ from RR to RR.

Last, I don't find that the thread name RR terminology is incorrect when the message contains information on...uh...RR terminology.

Mike Brock


Re: ADMIN: Freight Car Terminology

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Mike Brock notes:



And, we aren't too far from arguing about the [ OHMYGOSH! ] lack of a defined distance from the point of a frog to the point [ or even the dreaded 1/2" ] where the closure rail becomes a wing rail...



Mike Brock



Argue away, Mike, but PLEASE change the subject line . . .



Schuyler









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


Re: Latitudinals

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Rob,

 

The only “book” I am referring to is Vol. 16 of the Railroad Prototype Cyclopedia.

 

And that reminds me of what I intended to append to my last post.  This group owes a tremendous debt to Ed Hawkins and Pat Wider, for their continued efforts to provide definitive and pretty exhaustive (and probably exhausting) research and readable documentation of what we’re all interested in here.  Steam era Freight Cars.

 

Thank you, Ed and Pat.

 

Schuyler

 


Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals

 

 

Eave!  - thanks Schuyler. 

 

You appear to have referred to a book in paragraph 2.   Which book?

 

I appreciate your comments on the spotting features.  Didn’t previously have awareness of the variety of LATITUDINAL running boards. 

 

Rob Kirkham 

 

Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2015 5:29 PM

Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals

 




It’s hard not to agree with Jack’s opinion expressed in his self-categorized “rant.”  But that’s the term of art in the steam era.

 

But Jack’s right about the third style, using z-shapes on the edges of the latitudinals.  The spotting feature for these would be, based on the UP example (B-50-34 and -35 classes, built by Pullman Standard, 1938) would be that there is nothing reaching over the eave (not eve).  The ends of the z-shape is flattened and welded (it appears) to the roof’s surface.  The grab supports are bolted to the upper surface of the z-shapes.  Based on a good hard squint at the photo on page 67, I’d say the IM version is still wanting, as it appears that the upper flat of the z-shape and the boards are flush; the boards are not standing proud of the steel.

 

The other two styles have the straps reaching over the edge of the roof proper down onto the eave construction  Interestingly, it appears not uncommon for the straps to be fastened to a small plate or angle which extends upward a few inches to serve as the connection for the flat bar.  In other cases, the flat is riveted directly to the vertical face of the roof panels.

 

To tell the channel variety apart from the strap version, I think (not based on Really Looking at Photos) that you may well see some bolts (lengthwise to the car) at the eave end of the channel style, connecting the channel to a strap or tab, perhaps, that reaches up and over the edge of the roof, similarly to the plate or angle mentioned in the last paragraph.  The channel would indeed mask the ends of the boards, if you can see that side, so it would appear smooth

 

Take note, however, that the appearance of a smooth side to the latitudinals COULD suggest that the running board is steel.  Several of the steel versions have an edge folded down that is smooth, and could mimic the appearance of the channel edge construction.  A give-away could be the presence of a nut at the end of a rod around the midpoint of a channel side wood latitudinal, whereas the steel versions have no such nut.

 

Schuyler.

 


Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals

 

I agree with your last comment Jack.

 

With the work I’m doing on an NP 1937 AAR car, I got thinking about spotting features for low angle shots.  Thanks to Ed Hawkins I have solid information for modelling the car.  But I know I won’t always get so lucky with clear data.  So was trying to make sense of some of what has been discussed here.  Does this make sense: 

 

Is it the case that latitudinal running boards supported by channel or Z section stock will have a straight solid edge if viewed from the car end or other angle; Conversely will those with boards bolted to steel strapping beneath have the notched look of individual, spaced boards.   Seems like an obvious inference to me.

 

Where the angle of the photo doesn’t allow that perspective, can we infer anything from the way the supports mount to the car roof or eve?  For example, is it the case that those designs using channel or Z profile supports ran from the longitudinal running boards down at a steeper angle than the roof slope, to touch the car roof near the eve?  In contrast, is it typically the case that latitudinal running boards mounted on strap steel were aligned on a plane approximately parallel to the slope of the roof, and the steel straps curved over the eve to mount in a more vertical plane?   Would the attachment method and “parallel” or “not parallel” slope be useful spotting features?

 

Rob Kirkham 

 

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals


There's a third fairly common lat. running board support, which is shown on p.67 of RPC16. The supports are steel pressed into a Z section, with the boards bolted to the lower horizontal flange. This seems to be the type that Intermountain  modeled on its O scale AAR 1937 boxcar. This detail was poorly rendered, one of the few lapses on this model, which raised the bar for fine detail in a plastic model several decades ago.

 

Absent a good photo looking down at the roof, the type of support for the lat. can often be identified from its end in a good view of the car side.

 

Jack Mullen

 


Re: ADMIN: Freight Car Terminology

Mikebrock
 


Charlie Tapper has a good point, writing:

"Not taking any sides here. But are all the terms used by the historian/modeler actually prototype? Or have some been generated to cover a lack specificity or concern on the prototype's part? Like a "Dartnaught" end and the like. Like the "phase" system with diesels and panels or ribs on a gob, it facilitates description for modeling et al, but was of no concern to the prototype. It was an Alco 120 ton 1000 hp switching locomotive without regard to radiator slat size or orientation. In discussion of modeling the radiator gear, a phase/mark becomes important, by way of example."
 
IOW, if the car being modeled has certain physical elements not described or referenced by the real RR nomenclature, might it not be useful to generate one? I would think so but, of course, we then have the issue of deciding who defines it?
 
Several yrs ago I tried to see if the modeling community would define a description for steel doors on box cars AND steel ends. Alas, it never happened. Now I have to describe the number of ribs top down...or is it bottom up? Same with the doors. Doable but...
 
And, we aren't too far from arguing about the [ OHMYGOSH! ] lack of a defined distance from the point of a frog to the point [ or even the dreaded 1/2" ] where the closure rail becomes a wing rail...
 
Mike Brock
 
 
 
 


Re: Latitudinals

Robert kirkham
 

Eave!  - thanks Schuyler. 
 
You appear to have referred to a book in paragraph 2.   Which book?
 
I appreciate your comments on the spotting features.  Didn’t previously have awareness of the variety of LATITUDINAL running boards. 
 
Rob Kirkham 
 

Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2015 5:29 PM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals
 


It’s hard not to agree with Jack’s opinion expressed in his self-categorized “rant.”  But that’s the term of art in the steam era.

 

But Jack’s right about the third style, using z-shapes on the edges of the latitudinals.  The spotting feature for these would be, based on the UP example (B-50-34 and -35 classes, built by Pullman Standard, 1938) would be that there is nothing reaching over the eave (not eve).  The ends of the z-shape is flattened and welded (it appears) to the roof’s surface.  The grab supports are bolted to the upper surface of the z-shapes.  Based on a good hard squint at the photo on page 67, I’d say the IM version is still wanting, as it appears that the upper flat of the z-shape and the boards are flush; the boards are not standing proud of the steel.

 

The other two styles have the straps reaching over the edge of the roof proper down onto the eave construction  Interestingly, it appears not uncommon for the straps to be fastened to a small plate or angle which extends upward a few inches to serve as the connection for the flat bar.  In other cases, the flat is riveted directly to the vertical face of the roof panels.

 

To tell the channel variety apart from the strap version, I think (not based on Really Looking at Photos) that you may well see some bolts (lengthwise to the car) at the eave end of the channel style, connecting the channel to a strap or tab, perhaps, that reaches up and over the edge of the roof, similarly to the plate or angle mentioned in the last paragraph.  The channel would indeed mask the ends of the boards, if you can see that side, so it would appear smooth

 

Take note, however, that the appearance of a smooth side to the latitudinals COULD suggest that the running board is steel.  Several of the steel versions have an edge folded down that is smooth, and could mimic the appearance of the channel edge construction.  A give-away could be the presence of a nut at the end of a rod around the midpoint of a channel side wood latitudinal, whereas the steel versions have no such nut.

 

Schuyler.

 


Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals

 

I agree with your last comment Jack.

 

With the work I’m doing on an NP 1937 AAR car, I got thinking about spotting features for low angle shots.  Thanks to Ed Hawkins I have solid information for modelling the car.  But I know I won’t always get so lucky with clear data.  So was trying to make sense of some of what has been discussed here.  Does this make sense: 

 

Is it the case that latitudinal running boards supported by channel or Z section stock will have a straight solid edge if viewed from the car end or other angle; Conversely will those with boards bolted to steel strapping beneath have the notched look of individual, spaced boards.   Seems like an obvious inference to me.

 

Where the angle of the photo doesn’t allow that perspective, can we infer anything from the way the supports mount to the car roof or eve?  For example, is it the case that those designs using channel or Z profile supports ran from the longitudinal running boards down at a steeper angle than the roof slope, to touch the car roof near the eve?  In contrast, is it typically the case that latitudinal running boards mounted on strap steel were aligned on a plane approximately parallel to the slope of the roof, and the steel straps curved over the eve to mount in a more vertical plane?   Would the attachment method and “parallel” or “not parallel” slope be useful spotting features?

 

Rob Kirkham 

 

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals


There's a third fairly common lat. running board support, which is shown on p.67 of RPC16. The supports are steel pressed into a Z section, with the boards bolted to the lower horizontal flange. This seems to be the type that Intermountain  modeled on its O scale AAR 1937 boxcar. This detail was poorly rendered, one of the few lapses on this model, which raised the bar for fine detail in a plastic model several decades ago.

 

Absent a good photo looking down at the roof, the type of support for the lat. can often be identified from its end in a good view of the car side.

 

Jack Mullen

 


2015 NERPM is May 29-30 in Collinsville, Conn.

Dave Owens
 

Hello all:

The 13th New England/Northeast Prototype Modelers Meet (NERPM) will be
Friday and Saturday, May 29-30 at the Canton Community Center in
Collinsville, Connecticut. We are an NMRA-sponsored event.

The meet is two days of clinics, a large model display and layout open
houses on Sunday, May 31.

Registrations forms can be downloaded from our website,
www.neprototypemeet.com. There are also photos form past meets.

We're planning a full array of clinics and programs, a DCC round
table, a white elephant table, a raffle with spectacular contributions
from the finest manufacturers and retailers, and a host of great
manufacturers and vendors, including Bob's Photo, Ron's Books and
Funaro & Camerlengo, ESU Loksound, Atlas and Rapido.

Do you have a clinic or program you'd like to present? We'd love to
hear from you. I can be reached at neprotomeet@gmail.com.

For more information, please visit our website or join us at Facebook.com/nerpm.

Any questions? Please don't hesitate to contact me.

Thank you,

Dave Owens
West Hartford, Conn.

P.S. -- Please excuse the cross posting. Since we are non-profit and
scramble to pay for the meet, one of the ways we reach people is
through various email lists. Thank you.



--
2015 New England/Northeast Prototype Modelers Meet
May 29-30, 2015 (Always the weekend after Memorial Day)
Collinsville, Connecticut
www.neprototypemeet.com
www.facebook.com/NERPM


Re: ADMIN: Freight Car Terminology

Mikebrock
 

Jerry Michels weites:

"However, I fail to see where the mention of switch vs. turnout or roofwalk vs. running board would prevent "as great a degree of accuracy as possible."

It's the practice of using terms...be they "roof walk" [ whatever that is ] or "weird little pipe"...that someone makes up that is at issue.

"If a person states he hand laid a #8 switch, would one actually be confused and think a #8 electrical switch was constructed?"

What's a #8 electrical switch?

"If we have to continue this discussion as it has been going on now for three or four days, how about instituting peer review for posts? Those whose sensibilities are greatly disturbed by other members egregious misuse of railroad terms could form a committee to review all
Oops, misread the calendar, it's March 1st not April 1st!"

Probably not...even on May 1st.

Mike Brock
STMFC Owner


Re: Latitudinals

Schuyler Larrabee
 

It’s hard not to agree with Jack’s opinion expressed in his self-categorized “rant.”  But that’s the term of art in the steam era.

 

But Jack’s right about the third style, using z-shapes on the edges of the latitudinals.  The spotting feature for these would be, based on the UP example (B-50-34 and -35 classes, built by Pullman Standard, 1938) would be that there is nothing reaching over the eave (not eve).  The ends of the z-shape is flattened and welded (it appears) to the roof’s surface.  The grab supports are bolted to the upper surface of the z-shapes.  Based on a good hard squint at the photo on page 67, I’d say the IM version is still wanting, as it appears that the upper flat of the z-shape and the boards are flush; the boards are not standing proud of the steel.

 

The other two styles have the straps reaching over the edge of the roof proper down onto the eave construction  Interestingly, it appears not uncommon for the straps to be fastened to a small plate or angle which extends upward a few inches to serve as the connection for the flat bar.  In other cases, the flat is riveted directly to the vertical face of the roof panels.

 

To tell the channel variety apart from the strap version, I think (not based on Really Looking at Photos) that you may well see some bolts (lengthwise to the car) at the eave end of the channel style, connecting the channel to a strap or tab, perhaps, that reaches up and over the edge of the roof, similarly to the plate or angle mentioned in the last paragraph.  The channel would indeed mask the ends of the boards, if you can see that side, so it would appear smooth

 

Take note, however, that the appearance of a smooth side to the latitudinals COULD suggest that the running board is steel.  Several of the steel versions have an edge folded down that is smooth, and could mimic the appearance of the channel edge construction.  A give-away could be the presence of a nut at the end of a rod around the midpoint of a channel side wood latitudinal, whereas the steel versions have no such nut.

 

Schuyler.

 


Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals

 

I agree with your last comment Jack.

 

With the work I’m doing on an NP 1937 AAR car, I got thinking about spotting features for low angle shots.  Thanks to Ed Hawkins I have solid information for modelling the car.  But I know I won’t always get so lucky with clear data.  So was trying to make sense of some of what has been discussed here.  Does this make sense: 

 

Is it the case that latitudinal running boards supported by channel or Z section stock will have a straight solid edge if viewed from the car end or other angle; Conversely will those with boards bolted to steel strapping beneath have the notched look of individual, spaced boards.   Seems like an obvious inference to me.

 

Where the angle of the photo doesn’t allow that perspective, can we infer anything from the way the supports mount to the car roof or eve?  For example, is it the case that those designs using channel or Z profile supports ran from the longitudinal running boards down at a steeper angle than the roof slope, to touch the car roof near the eve?  In contrast, is it typically the case that latitudinal running boards mounted on strap steel were aligned on a plane approximately parallel to the slope of the roof, and the steel straps curved over the eve to mount in a more vertical plane?   Would the attachment method and “parallel” or “not parallel” slope be useful spotting features?

 

Rob Kirkham 

 

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals


There's a third fairly common lat. running board support, which is shown on p.67 of RPC16. The supports are steel pressed into a Z section, with the boards bolted to the lower horizontal flange. This seems to be the type that Intermountain  modeled on its O scale AAR 1937 boxcar. This detail was poorly rendered, one of the few lapses on this model, which raised the bar for fine detail in a plastic model several decades ago.

 

Absent a good photo looking down at the roof, the type of support for the lat. can often be identified from its end in a good view of the car side.

 

Jack Mullen

 


Re: Bettendor Tanks Cars

Armand Premo
 


Nomenclature:While there are technical terms,railroad men had their own terminology for equipment and the various jobs on and around the property.I am sure we can all come up with a list of some of these  slang terms.Van,Caboose,way cars,buggies,bobbers,Car knockers,Hogs and hogheads just to mention a few,Hanging around  railroad men one would come up with terms that were probably unique to a particular railroad and spiced their vocabulary.The terms varied from road to road and job to job.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 5:48 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Bettendor Tanks Cars

 

Only one, and it's only included to illustrate a Bettendorf truck user.  The car is lettered for the Carstens Packing Co, a Tacoma, Washington concern.  It  was built by Seattle Car & Foundry Co., and has the side door offset WAY to the left.

Brian Leppert
Carson City, NV

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4257/9201 - Release Date: 02/28/15


Re: Latitudinals

Robert kirkham
 

I agree with your last comment Jack.
 
With the work I’m doing on an NP 1937 AAR car, I got thinking about spotting features for low angle shots.  Thanks to Ed Hawkins I have solid information for modelling the car.  But I know I won’t always get so lucky with clear data.  So was trying to make sense of some of what has been discussed here.  Does this make sense: 
 
Is it the case that latitudinal running boards supported by channel or Z section stock will have a straight solid edge if viewed from the car end or other angle; Conversely will those with boards bolted to steel strapping beneath have the notched look of individual, spaced boards.   Seems like an obvious inference to me.
 
Where the angle of the photo doesn’t allow that perspective, can we infer anything from the way the supports mount to the car roof or eve?  For example, is it the case that those designs using channel or Z profile supports ran from the longitudinal running boards down at a steeper angle than the roof slope, to touch the car roof near the eve?  In contrast, is it typically the case that latitudinal running boards mounted on strap steel were aligned on a plane approximately parallel to the slope of the roof, and the steel straps curved over the eve to mount in a more vertical plane?   Would the attachment method and “parallel” or “not parallel” slope be useful spotting features?
 
Rob Kirkham 
 

Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2015 3:48 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Latitudinals
 


There's a third fairly common lat. running board support, which is shown on p.67 of RPC16. The supports are steel pressed into a Z section, with the boards bolted to the lower horizontal flange. This seems to be the type that Intermountain  modeled on its O scale AAR 1937 boxcar. This detail was poorly rendered, one of the few lapses on this model, which raised the bar for fine detail in a plastic model several decades ago.
 
Absent a good photo looking down at the roof, the type of support for the lat. can often be identified from its end in a good view of the car side.
 
Jack Mullen
 


Bettendorf tank car pics

Robert kirkham
 

In the vein of other conversations today (is it March of April 1st), I was amused by the car owned by James S. Kirk. I wonder if the tank car business was was a valued enterprise in that family . . . .

I would be curious to try to figure out what became of the various owners. How many were subsumed into GATC or other large groups? How many then remained in service to, say 1945 or later?

Rob Kirkham

-----Original Message-----
From: Cyril and Lynn Durrenberger durrecj@sbcglobal.net [STMFC]
Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2015 1:16 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] New file uploaded to STMFC

Brian,

Thanks for copying and posting those photos of the early tank cars. It looks like most were built new by Bettendorf, with a few rebuilt by them. The only ones with arch bar trucks were the UTL cars. Most had the handrail attached to the tank, but a couple still had the handrail mounted on posts.

It appears that the walks were steel. Is that correct?

The head blocks had a rod through them that was attached to the center sill sort of like a truss rod. An interesting design.

If this was from a 1907 catalog, then isn't this a pretty early use of the cast steel design sideframe truck made by Bettendorf aka Bettendorf truck? Do any of the trucks that you make follow this design?

There are two cars that have a capacity of 12,000 gallons.

Note the strange Swift "tank car".

There is a real small 3,000 gallon tank car. I wonder what it hauled.

There is a photo of an early sulfuric acid tank car.

I found it interesting that this underframe for the tank cars did not use their single I beam underframe, or did that come later.

Cyril Durrenberger

--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 3/1/15, STMFC@yahoogroups.com <STMFC@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Subject: [STMFC] New file uploaded to STMFC
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, March 1, 2015, 2:10 PM














Hello,



This email message is a notification to let you know that

a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the STMFC

group.



File : /Bettendorf Tank Car/page 63 001.jpg

Uploaded by : brianleppert@att.net
<brianleppert@att.net>

Description : Contact Process Co



You can access this file at the URL:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/STMFC/files/Bettendorf%20Tank%20Car/page%2063%20001.jpg



To learn more about file sharing for your group, please
visit:

https://help.yahoo.com/kb/index?page=content&y=PROD_GRPS&locale=en_US&id=SLN15398



Regards,



brianleppert@att.net <brianleppert@att.net>











#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516 --
#yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp {
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px
0;padding:0 10px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp hr {
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp #yiv9567558516hd {
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp #yiv9567558516ads {
margin-bottom:10px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp .yiv9567558516ad {
padding:0 0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp .yiv9567558516ad p {
margin:0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mkp .yiv9567558516ad a {
color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9567558516ygrp-lc {
font-family:Arial;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9567558516ygrp-lc #yiv9567558516hd {
margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9567558516ygrp-lc .yiv9567558516ad {
margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516actions {
font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516activity {
background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516activity span {
font-weight:700;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516activity span:first-child {
text-transform:uppercase;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516activity span a {
color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516activity span span {
color:#ff7900;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516activity span
.yiv9567558516underline {
text-decoration:underline;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516attach {
clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516attach div a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516attach img {
border:none;padding-right:5px;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516attach label {
display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516attach label a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 blockquote {
margin:0 0 0 4px;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516bold {
font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516bold a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 dd.yiv9567558516last p a {
font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9567558516 dd.yiv9567558516last p span {
margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9567558516 dd.yiv9567558516last p
span.yiv9567558516yshortcuts {
margin-right:0;}

#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516attach-table div div a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516attach-table {
width:400px;}

#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516file-title a, #yiv9567558516
div.yiv9567558516file-title a:active, #yiv9567558516
div.yiv9567558516file-title a:hover, #yiv9567558516
div.yiv9567558516file-title a:visited {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516photo-title a,
#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516photo-title a:active,
#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516photo-title a:hover,
#yiv9567558516 div.yiv9567558516photo-title a:visited {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 div#yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg
#yiv9567558516ygrp-msg p a span.yiv9567558516yshortcuts {
font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516green {
color:#628c2a;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516MsoNormal {
margin:0 0 0 0;}

#yiv9567558516 o {
font-size:0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516photos div {
float:left;width:72px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516photos div div {
border:1px solid
#666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516photos div label {
color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516reco-category {
font-size:77%;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516reco-desc {
font-size:77%;}

#yiv9567558516 .yiv9567558516replbq {
margin:4px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {
margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg {
font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg table {
font-size:inherit;font:100%;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg select,
#yiv9567558516 input, #yiv9567558516 textarea {
font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9567558516
code {
font:115% monospace;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg * {
line-height:1.22em;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9567558516logo {
padding-bottom:10px;}


#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-msg p a {
font-family:Verdana;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-msg
p#yiv9567558516attach-count span {
color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-reco
#yiv9567558516reco-head {
color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-reco {
margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-sponsor #yiv9567558516ov
li a {
font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-sponsor #yiv9567558516ov
li {
font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-sponsor #yiv9567558516ov
ul {
margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-text {
font-family:Georgia;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-text p {
margin:0 0 1em 0;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-text tt {
font-size:120%;}

#yiv9567558516 #yiv9567558516ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {
border-right:none !important;
}
#yiv9567558516



------------------------------------
Posted by: Cyril and Lynn Durrenberger <durrecj@sbcglobal.net>
------------------------------------


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

Yahoo Groups Links

57581 - 57600 of 189831