Date   

Whose proprietary gondola end?

gary laakso
 

The proprietary gondola end is on DRGW 47495:
 
 
gary laakso
south of Mike Brock


Re: Broadway ltd announces 6,000 gallon ACF type 27 tank car

Mark Drake <markstation01@...>
 

Nothing yet, I'm waiting patiently as well 

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android


From:"Jon Miller atsfus@... [STMFC]"
Date:Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 2:58 PM
Subject:Re: [STMFC] Broadway ltd announces 6,000 gallon ACF type 27 tank car

 

On 6/20/2015 10:29 AM, mopac1@... [STMFC] wrote:
Has Broadway Limited ever posted photos or drawing of the various paint schemes they are offering?

No!  The only photo is the Hooker car (prototype)!

I was going to order a variety pack but can't determine date's of the cars so no go.

--
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: Broadway ltd announces 6,000 gallon ACF type 27 tank car

Jon Miller <atsfus@...>
 

On 6/20/2015 10:29 AM, mopac1@... [STMFC] wrote:
Has Broadway Limited ever posted photos or drawing of the various paint schemes they are offering?

No!  The only photo is the Hooker car (prototype)!

I was going to order a variety pack but can't determine date's of the cars so no go.

-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: Broadway ltd announces 6,000 gallon ACF type 27 tank car

Gene Semon
 

Has Broadway Limited ever posted photos or drawing of the various paint schemes they are offering?


Gene Semon


M-24a/b covered hoppers from boxcars

Jim Mischke
 

Recently offered on ebay was B&O 287015, photo is attached for the B&O list.  It is mislabeled as a plain M-24 USRA boxcar, it is actually a hopper bottom boxcar class M-24a, reported at Parkersburg, W.Va. circa 1955, Paul Dunn photograph.  Reweigh date is in 1951.  Note the diagonal rivet passing by the B&O dome herald which hold the slope sheets.  This image is correctly identified in Ed Hawkins' publication RP-CYC in its feature article about USRA single sheath boxcars.
There has long been confusion about these cars, maybe we can sort it out a little.
In 1933, B&O needed some equipment to cover a large new cement account, for the Vang Construction Company, a major contractor working on Lock and Dam #3 on the Allegheny river at Pittsburgh.  This was at the beginning of some advanced materials handling technology and railroads slowly acknowledging the need for specialized equipment, even if it meant empty backhauls to the source.   Covered hoppers as we know them were just being developed by the equipment trade, B&O chose to do what D&H had recently done ...  equip boxcars with internal hoppers and roof hatches.   This was only practical because Vang and their cement supplier (probably Vang, too) could accommodate loading and unloading such equipment.  The alterative was endless cement bagging and bag dumping on a scale only a biblical scholar could appreciate.  B&O modified 40 M-24 USRA single sheath boxcars with hoppers and hopper doors as class M-24a 287000-287039.
These Vang cars, as they became known, worked this job for about four years, 1933-1937.  As this traffic tapered off, 18 cars in this series were reconverted to handle zinc cinders (B&O term, they must mean zinc sinters, a specialized industrial feedstock) for DuPont between New Castle, Pa. and Spelter W.Va. (also called Meadowbrook in a 1940 B&O memo.) as class M-24b.   Eight other cars in were redeployed to haul sand for Dupont between a quarry near Copley, Ohio on the AC&Y and Cleveland, Ohio, remaining as class M-24a.  These too, may have been modified for the different lading.   The other 14 M-24a hopper cars were converted back to M-24 boxcars.
The 26 remaining M-24a/b covered hopper cars remained active well into the 1950's, the Cleveland sand cars were still in the 1958 Summary of Equipment.
The key to this story was a specialized equipment table in the 1935 and 1941 Form 6 Lists of Stations and Sidings, and a 1940 memo in the B&OHS Arbutus archives.


Light analysis:
-  Although we might desire to model these cars, they were scarce.   These three jobs for cement, zinc powder, and sand may well have been the only work they did, dedicated services on limited routes for years at a time.
-  Some confusion about roof and high side hatches persists because differences in their Mt. Clare shop photos (mostly of car 287039) and the clearance diagrams.  Remember that shop photos and builders photos mostly show the first sample car, and may not reflect fleet appearance in service.  Hatches and hopper specifics may be determined by the lading hauled, and the facilities at each end of the trip.
-  The difference between the M-24a and M-24b is not called out in surviving B&O clearance diagrams.   We have B&O clearance diagrams for the M-24a/b, but not all revisions.  And the difference might be minor, say, a hopper hatch fitting important for material flow.   Takeaway is that all revisions may be important, don't be satisfied with only the first one found.  We may be a diagram revision or two away from resolving several questions.
-  I spoke once with Don Tichy about producing this B&O car in addition to the D&H Tichy boxcar and he was receptive.  The holdup is that the hopper arrangement on the B&O cars is very different and no illuminating source of such underbody detail has emerged.
-   We owe much to old time photographers Steve Davidson of Parkersburg and then Indianapolis, and Paul Dunn of Zanesville.  They may have known each other, traded, and railfanned together.   They kept a sharp eye out for both unique and common rolling stock, the way birders conscientiously keep a life list.  They knew what they were looking at and shooting; their collections survived to inform us today.
-  Future research directions:  (1)  some hopper and underbody documentation sufficient for model tooling, (2) the exact difference between the M-24a and M-24b versions, (3) which 26 car road numbers were M-24a/b, and (4) which industrial facilities at Copley, Cleveland, Spelter/Meadowbrook, New Castle, and near Pittsburgh handled these cars, some specifics might yield more photos and insight.


Discussion is invited, ours is a collective wisdom.









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


Re: Paint compatibility

Tim O'Connor
 

Pierre

You can't bake lacquer paints. Well, you can, but it does nothing but
evaporate any carrier residue. Accupaint, Star, and TruColor are lacquers.
I think Tamiya may also be a lacquer but not sure about that. Don't know
about Scalecoat II either. Floquil, Scalecoat and the "water base" [?]
acrylics are enamels. If everything were compatible with everything else
would it be possible to strip models? I once lightly weathered a factory
painted car with Accupaint and it definitely had some affect -- it revived
the factory paint and I could detect a paint odor from that car for weeks
afterwards.

Tim O'Connor



  I would say that if the various coats are properly dried and baked onto the model,
  there should be on issues at all.
 
Pierre Oliver


Re: Paint compatibility

Jim Betz
 

Allen,

My experience is that I can apply (air brush) any paint over
any other - but only if the paint you are applying over is
totally dry (a week or more after it looses -all- odor to the
'nose right up to the model sniff test') -and- if I don't apply
the later coats too "wet" -
That means use several (4 or more) "misting" passes and
build up the color slowly and carefully. If the surface
ever looks "wet" ... such as if you can see it is close to
running ... then you are risking interaction with any paint
that is below what you are shooting right now.
I do not adjust the amount of thinner - I use the same
ratio of thinner to color (from the bottle). I just take
more time to build up the later coats over the earlier
ones - and be sure the earlier coat is fully dry/cured.

It is my belief/understanding that both Floquil and
Scalecoat are lacquers (not enamels). As such they
"dry" by evaporating off the thinner(s). Their thinners
are similar, chemically, but can NOT be interchanged
to mix/thin in order to shoot the color.
The need to wait considerable time between types
of paints is also true of acrylics ... because acrylics
"cure" (the paint actually changes chemically) and
you want to let the curing go to 100% completion.
There are enamels out there (such as Model Master)
that behave similar to the lacquers and I pretty much
follow the same rules/methods. Again and as always -
I use the thinner from the same paint manufacturer
for air brushing.
But I use regular lacquer thinner as -part- of my clean
up procedure for all paints no matter what time. It
seems to be the only thing that gets that last little
bit of paint that is on the small air brush parts - and I
soak the parts in a small bottle of thinner with the lid
on tightly for several hours before the final check/drying.
It doesn't hurt to go shake the bottle every once in a
while during the soak. *G* My first clean up is to
shoot some straight thinner (of the paint type) thru
the brush and then move on to other less expensive
agents.

My bottom line - let it FULLY dry/cure and I can apply
any paint over any other.

I routinely use acrylics for weathering - both washes and
brush highlighting of details - over any and all paint ...
factory, lacquer, enamel, and acrylics = on both plastic and
brass ... and have not had any "interactions" between paint
types.
And then I usually apply a "dusting/blending coat" of a
lacquer (or acrylic, depending upon my mood) over the
top of the weathering washes ... again with no problems.
And -again- I leave the washes to cure for a week or
more before I do the final, very light, blending coat.

My motto is "no model is complete until it is weathered".
And I use the washes and brush details to vary the
amount of weathering from model to model. Yes, I
weather my brass and even my passenger trains. I
guess I'm just a weathering fool ...
- Jim B.

P.S. I haven't baked any paint job that wasn't Scalecoat.
But I definitely have applied acrylic weathering
over all other types of paint. Baking Scalecoat
both hurries the drying process and makes it
"smoother" - but it will air dry just fine.


Re: Paint compatibility

Pierre Oliver
 

I would say that if the various coats are properly dried and baked onto the model, there should be on issues at all.
Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 6/19/2015 10:27 PM, allencaintn@... [STMFC] wrote:

 

Now that Scalecoat is going or gone are their any compatibility issues with using various paints on the same brass engine? I have seveveral Southern RR steam brass engines to paint and need to know if I can use Scalecoat I Southern Green with Floquil Oxide Red and may have to use to TruColor for the smoke box graphite, black and silver. If compatible chemically what about heating to bake the ScaleCoat? Not talking about mixing them as a liquid but compatible to be applied over one another on a brass steam engine.

Thanks, Allen Cain



Re: SP TOFC trailers marked for NWP

Tony Thompson
 

dkorn (not signing his name)wrote:

 
This one goes to the masses, but is targeted for Tony Thompson - the SP guru. I am finishing up the SP Historical Society TOFC flat car and trailers. The decal sheet for the trailers includes markings for the NWP (my railroad prototype), but I have not been able to find any pictures of these trailers in any reference materials. I have checked Tony's SP freight car books and SP Trainline articles to no avail. Any assistance would be appreciated. Trying to keep things prototypical . . . a never ending adventure.

       The decal was designed from a single photo which was in the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley. We don't have permission (unless we pay a substantial fee) to reproduce it. But the NWP markings are straight from the photo. Contact me off list for more info.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: Pittsburg Pig Iron was Re: 70-ton ore cars in Utah

Dave Nelson
 

Just the SN.  The WP moved more tonnage as bridge traffic but there is no telling where it went

 

Dave Nelson

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 3:58 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Pittsburg Pig Iron was Re: 70-ton ore cars in Utah

 




Dave, those carload numbers are for the SN routing only, correct?  Or total by all routes?  


Re: Paint compatibility

Tim O'Connor
 

Scalecoat & Floquil -- definitely ok. TruColor? Maybe a final color, AFTER the
Scalecoat is baked on. There should never be a need to bake TruColor -- it is not
an enamel paint. I have applied thin amounts of one over the other (FL/SC or AP/TC
or vice versa) and I have applied FL to cars otherwise painted with AP (e.g. a
roof or underframe with FL while the rest is AP). But I've never tried a real
full "overcoat" of FC/SC vs AP/TC. I can imagine problems.

Tim O'Connor

Now that Scalecoat is going or gone are their any compatibility issues with using various paints on the same brass engine? I have seveveral Southern RR steam brass engines to paint and need to know if I can use Scalecoat I Southern Green with Floquil Oxide Red and may have to use to TruColor for the smoke box graphite, black and silver. If compatible chemically what about heating to bake the ScaleCoat? Not talking about mixing them as a liquid but compatible to be applied over one another on a brass steam engine.

Thanks, Allen Cain


Paint compatibility

Allen Cain
 

Now that Scalecoat is going or gone are their any compatibility issues with using various paints on the same brass engine? I have seveveral Southern RR steam brass engines to paint and need to know if I can use Scalecoat I Southern Green with Floquil Oxide Red and may have to use to TruColor for the smoke box graphite, black and silver. If compatible chemically what about heating to bake the ScaleCoat? Not talking about mixing them as a liquid but compatible to be applied over one another on a brass steam engine.

Thanks, Allen Cain


Re: Caboose Lighting?

Charles Peck
 

I remember a night driving down a road alongside a stopped train and I pulled off, wishing I had a camera.
The marker cast a streak of light along the side of the caboose and one window had an orange glow.
Two other windows had slight glow, reflected light it would seem. The dark cupola was silhouetted against
the sky while someone was standing on the rear platform with a red lantern and a cigarette. 
One of those moments, soak it in while wishing there were another way to record it all.
Chuck Peck 

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:56 PM, jimbetz jimbetz@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:
 

Hi again,

  So when a caboose was going down the road at night and
the lights were on in the interior - was the 'entire' caboose
lit up?
  Or was it some of the windows but not all?  Such as the
entire long end or the entire short end - but not necessarily
both ends?   Were there usually separate switches for each
end of the caboose so someone could sleep even if the
conductor was working at his desk?  Or did his desk have
an individual light shining just on the desk?
  Was there light showing in the cupola windows or just a
slight glow if at all?
  If it is was a bay window were the bay windows pretty
dark and just the end windows were well lit?
                                                                                              - Jim



Re: Caboose Lighting?

Steve SANDIFER
 

I am sure part of the answer depends on the timeframe under consideration. The early cabooses were all oil lamp lit - markets and interior. So it would not be real bright and would only be lit where the crew lit oil lamps.



Next were batteries for lights and later radios. Markers were electrified. Some of the ATSF 1875 class built in 1930 included axle driven generator, battery box, and lighting. Many others were not electrified until the mid 1950s.



When ATSF began rebulding cabooses in the mid 60s, they added the red light centered in the roofline and dropped the markers. They also added lights over each of the steps for safety purposes. A 1984 sketch by Charlie Slater of a CE-1 rebuild shows 4 ceiling lights inside the car, including one in the cupola.



This does not answer all of your questions, but should contribute to the discussion.



__________________________________________________

J. Stephen Sandifer

Minister Emeritus, Southwest Central Church of Christ

Webmaster, Santa Fe Railway Historical and Modeling Society



From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 8:57 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Caboose Lighting?





Hi again,

So when a caboose was going down the road at night and
the lights were on in the interior - was the 'entire' caboose
lit up?
Or was it some of the windows but not all? Such as the
entire long end or the entire short end - but not necessarily
both ends? Were there usually separate switches for each
end of the caboose so someone could sleep even if the
conductor was working at his desk? Or did his desk have
an individual light shining just on the desk?
Was there light showing in the cupola windows or just a
slight glow if at all?
If it is was a bay window were the bay windows pretty
dark and just the end windows were well lit?
- Jim





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


Re: Caboose Lighting?

John Larkin
 

I happen to own ex-UP 25624 and I can only address these cabooses with accurate knowledge, however I believe most modern steel cupola cabooses would share these traits.  The UP cabooses had switches for both ends.  The conductors desk had a switch for a wall mounted light for that hard working individual to keep up with their paperwork.  The cupola had its own switch and the lights below didn't intrude badly if one was in the cupola at night.  There were also large running lights mounted in the cupola (Red and green) that were controlled from the cupola.  We also had outside running lights in each corner that lit up the steps, controlled at each end.

Everything used 12V bulbs so the batteries could be wired directly with no change in voltage.  UP had generators that worked well most of the time.  The cupola mounted radio also was 12V.

25624 is still up in NW Iowa, up for sale now that the railroad is mostly gone.  It was one of the top three picks out of 200+ when we acquired it with the help of 2 UP carmen.  The choice finally came to that caboose because it had the original ladders and running boards, very handy to clean windows when needed.

John Larkin



On Friday, June 19, 2015 9:10 PM, "'Schuyler Larrabee' schuyler.larrabee@... [STMFC]" wrote:


 
Well, Jim, are you sure your caboose had electric lighting?  In the steam era, a lot of roads were still lighting their cabooses with kerosene lanterns.
 
If that’s the case, I’d think that there would be some slight glow around the conductor’s desk, and maybe some at the other end as the crew was awake while on the road.  If they were sleeping, it is likely that they were in a terminal and chose not to patronize the local railroad Y.  Cupolas were likely pretty dark, so the crew could really see out over the train, minimal reflections in the cupola glass.
 
Schuyler
 


  So when a caboose was going down the road at night and
the lights were on in the interior - was the 'entire' caboose
lit up?
  Or was it some of the windows but not all?  Such as the
entire long end or the entire short end - but not necessarily
both ends?   Were there usually separate switches for each
end of the caboose so someone could sleep even if the
conductor was working at his desk?  Or did his desk have
an individual light shining just on the desk?
  Was there light showing in the cupola windows or just a
slight glow if at all?
  If it is was a bay window were the bay windows pretty
dark and just the end windows were well lit?
                                                                                              - Jim



Re: Caboose Lighting?

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Well, Jim, are you sure your caboose had electric lighting?  In the steam era, a lot of roads were still lighting their cabooses with kerosene lanterns.

 

If that’s the case, I’d think that there would be some slight glow around the conductor’s desk, and maybe some at the other end as the crew was awake while on the road.  If they were sleeping, it is likely that they were in a terminal and chose not to patronize the local railroad Y.  Cupolas were likely pretty dark, so the crew could really see out over the train, minimal reflections in the cupola glass.

 

Schuyler

 



  So when a caboose was going down the road at night and
the lights were on in the interior - was the 'entire' caboose
lit up?
  Or was it some of the windows but not all?  Such as the
entire long end or the entire short end - but not necessarily
both ends?   Were there usually separate switches for each
end of the caboose so someone could sleep even if the
conductor was working at his desk?  Or did his desk have
an individual light shining just on the desk?
  Was there light showing in the cupola windows or just a
slight glow if at all?
  If it is was a bay window were the bay windows pretty
dark and just the end windows were well lit?
                                                                                              - Jim


Caboose Lighting?

Jim Betz
 

Hi again,

  So when a caboose was going down the road at night and
the lights were on in the interior - was the 'entire' caboose
lit up?
  Or was it some of the windows but not all?  Such as the
entire long end or the entire short end - but not necessarily
both ends?   Were there usually separate switches for each
end of the caboose so someone could sleep even if the
conductor was working at his desk?  Or did his desk have
an individual light shining just on the desk?
  Was there light showing in the cupola windows or just a
slight glow if at all?
  If it is was a bay window were the bay windows pretty
dark and just the end windows were well lit?
                                                                                              - Jim


Re: Pittsburg Pig Iron was Re: 70-ton ore cars in Utah

Mark Hemphill
 

Dave, those carload numbers are for the SN routing only, correct?  Or total by all routes?  I think the numbers you are seeing are foundry pig, not open-hearth pig, as by 1950 there shouldn't have been any need for open-hearth pig at Pittsburg, as it had converted to rolling hot-rolled coil from Geneva in 1949. 

I think there's a lot more detail that can be added on pig iron shipments, so if you don't mind, here's a summary.  There's a much more detail both on Don Strack's UtahRails.net site as well as in the book I authored a long time ago on the LA&SL, and the former, at least, is on-line.

Here's the detail:

1.  The original capacity of Columbia Steel at Ironton, 1924 to 1943, was 600 tons of iron per day, but it did not always run at that capacity (Great Depression, etc.).  After 1926, some of Ironton's output went to the adjacent Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co., which opened in 1926. The rest was split between Pittsburg and Torrance (the former Llewellyn Steel, purchased by Columbia Steel in 1923).  There was no other source for pig for the open hearths at Pittsburg or Torrance, unless Columbia wanted to purchase on the market and strand its investment in its own blast furnace.

2. In 1943, a second 900-ton/day blast furnace was opened at Ironton -- it was owned by the Defense Plant Corporation.  In 1943, 75% of the output of the two Ironton blast furnaces went to Pittsburg and Torrance, with the rest to PSCIP or other foundries, according to trade magazine Blast Furnace & Steel Plant. 

3.  In 1944, the DPC Geneva Works began producing steel. But the mill operated only for a short period, then was partially idled, as the steel demand for the war soon declined rapidly.

4.  In 1946, USS purchased Geneva from the DPC, A hot-rolled coil mill was added, and hot-rolled coil began being shipped to Pittsburg in early 1949.  Also post-war, Kaiser Steel purchased from the DPC the second (900-ton) blast furnace at Ironton, and for a period it supplied pig to both Fontana as well as to Chicago District mills.  Ironton ran off-and-on after WWII.

5.  After 1949, the preponderance of pig iron moving from either Ironton or Geneva (which did have a pig machine) to Pittsburg or Torrance would have been foundry pig.  The open-hearths at Torrance were shut down in 1952. 

Mark




Re: Dust-up over boxcar roofs

Guy Wilber
 

James Mischke wrote:

"The lawsuit shows conflict and acrimony amongst famous names in our freight car domain. This probably means Messers Murphy and Tatum may not have been drinking buddies nor on speaking terms thereafter. A certain awkwardness at subsequent Master Car Builders conventions, perhaps."

Jim,

The majority of Mr. Tatum's early patents associated with car roof design were assigned to Peter Murphy's company. Several of such patents being filed well past this particular lawsuit of 1912. Thus, the two had some sort of association for a number of years beyond this squabble.

Associate membership within The MCBA and (later) representative members of the ARA, ARA and AAR Mechanical Division were small in number contrasted with railroad membership and "vendors" were seldom active at conventions. Peter Murphy was not a member of any of the above listed associations (early on) though his later companies' representatives were present at the AAR Mechanical Division annual conventions as well as The Car Department Officers' Association conventions.

Tatum was, like most members of the car construction committees, a very astute man. His support of small roads during his long tenure were duly noted by the beneficiaries of his efforts. One of the most vocal proponents of the continuation of arch bar side frames during the debates of the late 1920s and early 1930s he was always full of facts regarding the impact a "too hasty" prohibition could have had on railroading as a whole. Though his own, and Washburn's arch bar side frames addressed many of the inherent weaknesses of existing designs they still fell well short of the continuing progress of cast steel side frames. His boasts of these two designs was the only time during his long tenure as a member of the committee in which he pushed for his own effort.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada


New MoPac Caboose decals

hubert mask
 

Pleased to announce five new decals available from 1930 to the 1960s  era caboose decals.

Please visit my web site maskislanddecals.com   go to caboose.

These decals are also available through the MoPac Historical society.


Hubert Mask

Mask Island Decals Inc.


48541 - 48560 of 183254