Date   

Lumber Shipments from Oregon in 1952 - Distribution by State

Charles Hostetler
 

These data are from the 1% Carload waybill survey.  They are all shipments of lumber, shingles, and lath (commodity class 411) from Oregon.  They represent a sample of 1 waybill out of every 100 terminated by Class 1 Railroads.  To show some of the variability, I have tabulated carloads in the sample for 1951, 1952, and 1953.  Some of the variability is caused by sampling error, while some probably represents actual changes from year to year.  In the column on the right I have calculated the geometric mean of the first 3 columns times 100; this number represents my best estimate of the total number of carloads originating in Oregon and terminating in the relevant state for the entire year of 1952.  


My analysis is that there is probably a slight increasing trend in lumber shipments from Oregon during the period 1951 through 1953 but there are probably no strong changes in the shipping pattern to each state that cannot be attributed to the sampling methodology.  The greatest number of shipments from Oregon are to California, to Texas, Illinois, Michigan, and to Oregon itself.  Of particular interest are the shipments of Oregon lumber to the south, right in the heart of southern yellow pine country (a main competitor).  Even the New England states are receiving a couple hundred carloads a year.  


I'm also interested in the number of shipments to Michigan (14,585) relative to Wisconsin (7,144) and Minnesota (9,711).  This suggests the possibility of substantial car ferry lumber traffic across Lake Michigan which is a particular interest of mine.  I'll address that in a future thread on the rail-marine interface.  


411 Lumber Shingle Lath



From Oregon








To: 1951 1952 1953 <1952>
Alabama 3 7 6 501
Arizona 34 35 40 3,624
Arkansas 9 9 18 1,134
California 355 255 257 28,547
Colorado 52 57 69 5,892
Connecticut 12 25 13 1,574
DC 3 6 3 378
Delaware 2 1 4 200
Florida 19 20 9 1,507
Georgia 2 6 4 363
Idaho 18 14 14 1,522
Illinois 154 180 170 16,765
Indiana 47 43 83 5,515
Iowa 68 63 69 6,661
Kansas 49 82 67 6,457
Kentucky 7 12 19 1,169
Louisiana 8 7 22 1,072
Maine 5 7 5 559
Maryland 15 15 11 1,353
Massachusetts 34 35 28 3,218
Michigan 136 135 169 14,585
Minnesota 117 86 91 9,711
Mississippi 3 1 3 208
Missouri 44 75 65 5,986
Montana 4 6 6 524
Nebraska 45 40 35 3,979
Nevada 4 5 7 519
New Hampshire 2 1 3 182
New Jersey 47 57 39 4,710
New Mexico 12 7 11 974
New York 102 91 97 9,656
North Carolina 2 6 3 330
North Dakota 10 11 12 1,097
Ohio 87 118 138 11,231
Oklahoma 58 60 68 6,185
Oregon 134 120 120 12,450
Pennsylvania 65 96 55 7,001
Rhode Island 4 8 4 504
South Carolina 7 2 5 412
South Dakota 9 13 11 1,088
Tennessee 16 14 41 2,094
Texas 163 212 213 19,452
Utah 17 16 17 1,666
Vermont 3 1 2 182
Virginia 4 12 11 808
Washington 67 53 72 6,347
West Virginia 5 6 9 646
Wisconsin 71 65 79 7,144
Wyoming 9 7 9 828





Total 2,143 2,203 2,306 218,512
Variance 46 47 48


Regards,

Charles Hostetler
Washington, Ill.



What's in a name

richramik@...
 

I realize this is a bit off topic, but this is a question that I have been thinking about for a while now.  I've done some research but have not found the rationale or reason for using the following:
  • railroad
  • railway
  • lines
  • system

What would be the reasoning for using any of the four.  For example,
  • Pennsylvania Railroad
  • Great Northern Railway
  • Southern Pacific Lines
  • New York Central System

I guess what I am really asking is what are the differences between them?


Thanks,

Rich Ramik


Re: Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Origination of Loads

Charles Hostetler
 

Andy and Schuyler,

I have 2 waybills from the 1950s that I have been able to identify as reconsigned (both are lumber "rollers" I think).  Both show changes in the route box and the consignee box but are on the originating line haul carrier's paperwork.  Also if I understand the Freight Traffic Red Book correctly, the reconsignment privilege doesn't terminate the original shipment and start a new one; it merely extends the original shipment.  So I don't think that reconsignment is the reason that the tabulated number of shipments is different than the tabulated number of receipts.  

Regards,

Charles


Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?

Brian Termunde
 

Now talk about coincidences! I was, for some reason, trying yesterday to think of a certain supermarket in SoCal, and was thought that maybe I would do a search and see if I could find the companies name, and here it is, you mention Market Basket! Thanks Charlie!

Take Care,
 
Brian R. Termunde
Midvale, Utah
 
"My Train of Thought left the station without me!"

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

4a. Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?
Posted by: "Charles Slater" atsfcondr42@... atsfcondr42
Date: Thu Dec 24, 2015 2:40 pm ((PST))

I remember handling box cars of Christmas trees in the 1970-1984 in L.A. when I worked on the Los Angeles Junction Ry. They came in many cars mostly from the north west (SP&S, NP, GN, Milw) and of course Santa Fe, UP and SP returning to home rails. As I remember they were mostly 40 foot cars. We delivered them to Certified Grocers and Market Basket warehouse's. The guys unloading them there would always give you one, you just had to ask.

Charlie Slater

Bakersfield, Ca.

________________________________


Re: Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Origination of Loads

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Is a reconsigned shipment an “origination?”

 

Schuyler

 

Keep those rollers rolling! Reconsigned shipments help account for more originations than terminations.
Andy L.


Re: Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Origination of Loads

Andy Laurent
 

Keep those rollers rolling! Reconsigned shipments help account for more originations than terminations.
Andy L.


Re: Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Through or Interchange Traffic

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Charles,

I've had some fun playing with these statistics in regards to the Western Pacific.

So the WP handled 15,602 cars of lumber in 1952. Of these 3,112 originated on the WP, 2,062 terminated there (with 159 originating online), and 10,587 were handed off to other roads. I assume the majority of this traffic would have originated on the GN, came down the Inside Gateway, then would have split in two directions. Some would have moved east at Keddie to be handed off to the D&RGW at Salt Lake City, with possibly a small portion going to the UP. Some of the remainer moved south toward the Bay Area as terminating traffic, with most overhead cars going to the ATSF at Stockton headed to Southern California.

That sounds easy, but it's misleading. What's missing here is how much traffic originated on the WP's shortline feeders, rather than coming off the GN. In 1952 there were three important shortlines on the WP interchanging mostly lumber: Almanor Railroad, Quincy Railroad and Feather River Railway. Obviously this traffic is in the statistics, but can't be broken out. Nor do we have any information on how much traffic from these lines would have been handed off to other lines and how much went beyond the WP. This would tend to make the Inside Gateway traffic look larger.

I was also interested to see that the Southern's components are all listed separately. When you lump the four lines together, the Southern totals become much more significant. The SP becomes even larger when you add the T&NO and NWP to the SP. The same is true for the C&NW and CMO.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff


Re: Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Origination of Loads

maynard stowe
 

Wow look at the total for the NWP-an SP subsidiary--  More loads than GN or NP.  And a very high percentage of those 41 thousand loads must have been redwood.  virtually all of that lumber would be the traffic that then went out over the SP giving the SP a large bridge  route total.
Maynard Stowe


Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Through or Interchange Traffic

Charles Hostetler
 

These data show the carloads of lumber that each Class 1 carrier handled as interchange traffic (neither originated or terminated on line).  The second column shows the percent of interchange traffic relative to the total number of cars handled.  For example, interchange carloads on the UP were 62% of the total lumber carloads handled (the other 38% were either originations or terminations).  The total number of interchange carloads exceed both the number of originations and terminations, showing that most lumber loads traveled on at least 3 carriers (the originating road, one [or more] bridge roads, and the terminating road).  


Carrier Through % Traffic
UP 99026 62.50%
DRGW 56621 89.89%
CBQ 47757 68.95%
SP 42494 15.56%
CNW 41256 52.04%
PRR 37159 33.25%
MP 32496 46.87%
RI 30193 58.65%
CMO 28894 83.74%
SOO 28734 70.70%
GN 28301 36.00%
NYC 27776 30.06%
RFP 23637 97.44%
SOU (CNOTP) 22698 83.03%
NP 21937 30.42%
SOU 21643 29.17%
IC 20975 29.06%
BO 19907 38.14%
WAB 19076 62.61%
MILW 18163 25.62%
SPS 17642 29.31%
DWP 17369 99.48%
NKP 16878 57.99%
RDG 15658 57.47%
MStL 15492 85.06%
EJE 14876 86.96%
CGW 12105 76.84%
CO 11623 27.73%
LN 11300 24.84%
ACL 11049 21.13%
ERIE 10725 38.94%
WP 10587 67.86%
TNO 10336 33.56%
SOU (AGS) 9492 71.69%
CS 9190 73.10%
CRP 9131 93.56%
NWP 8670 17.16%
NYCN 8591 100.00%
SLSF 8586 32.57%
SAL 8024 22.01%
LV 7995 52.90%
DLW 7833 60.46%
GTW 7721 37.14%
WM 7682 69.61%
MON 7521 66.41%
CV 7500 87.99%
NW 7491 43.22%
DSSA 7420 57.02%
DH 7402 67.65%
BM 7122 27.17%
CG 6963 20.79%
TP 6777 31.21%
GMO 6356 24.24%
ATSF 6278 10.75%
CNJ 6087 41.51%
SSW 6086 47.67%
NH 5284 16.50%
KCS 5066 45.89%
CEI 5056 66.71%
CRR 4731 71.29%
MKT 4716 39.49%
FWD 4446 57.05%
CP(VT) 4428 95.08%
AA 4296 76.77%
GBW 4242 91.84%
KOG 4199 93.24%
NCStL 3893 38.47%
TPW 3631 85.51%
CWC 2993 48.63%
NS 2910 37.28%
DTS 2826 74.23%
LHR 2764 96.68%
SOU (GSF) 2763 43.63%
MEC 2761 36.66%
GA 2529 27.24%
WRA 2163 46.01%
GF 2064 33.67%
PWV 2058 71.42%
ACY 1947 56.64%
AWP 1935 56.27%
OW 1819 59.76%
SI 1800 35.26%
SLSF (Texas) 1796 71.12%
MP (IGN) 1675 25.48%
SOU (NONE) 1512 46.83%
CP(Me) 1444 94.17%
LA 1311 18.07%
VGN 1121 36.61%
CIM 1092 71.78%
ITC 1077 65.72%
AD 1030 58.07%
MP (GCL) 878 19.30%
DTI 765 24.76%
PLE 508 22.66%
R 391 45.19%
CN (NE) 240 19.94%
MI 226 27.68%
NYSW 207 12.60%
MSC 201 11.73%
LNE 178 27.79%
PRSL 95 3.32%
SN 92 6.21%
MV 88 5.38%
BAR 82 7.30%
TM 74 5.39%
SIR 27 6.78%
C&G 24 2.09%
TC 22 1.52%
OKCAA 17 3.51%
LIRR 16 0.08%
FEC 16 0.18%
BLE 14 1.91%
DMIR 10 1.21%
DM 2 0.55%
LSI 2 0.29%
MGA 1 0.38%
ASAB 1 0.20%



Total 1,123,858


Best Wishes for the Holiday Season!

Charles Hostetler
Washington Ill.



Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Terminations

Charles Hostetler
 

These data show the lumber loads terminated by Class 1 carriers during 1952.  The column labeled % on Line shows the percentage that originated on Line; while the remainder represent terminations that originated offline and were interchanged prior to delivery.  So about half of the SP's traffic stayed online, while very little of the PRR and NYC traffic originated on line.  Note that the distribution of terminations is much broader than there distribution of originations (previous post).  This suggests that while only a relatively few carriers are originating a lot of traffic, they are delivered to a much wider "national audience" of consignees.  This observation is consistent with the notion that the "reach" of lumber shipments was transcontinental in nature.  The observant will notice that the number of originations (previous post) is not equal to the number of terminations.  Christmas Eve bonus points will be awarded for identifying the reason or reasons and what we can infer about lumber shipments  :)


Carrier Terminations % on Line
SP 71692 53.13%
PRR 70882 4.35%
NYC 60532 3.15%
ATSF 44338 13.95%
CNW 36334 8.21%
IC 35830 44.09%
MILW 33221 25.75%
BO 29715 6.07%
SOU 29194 33.55%
MP 27041 36.54%
NH 26565 0.59%
UP 26439 35.39%
CO 25056 6.56%
LIRR 21121 0.04%
CBQ 20468 4.88%
GN 19789 53.11%
LN 19732 50.46%
NP 18304 46.67%
RI 17133 11.87%
BM 16919 7.11%
TNO 16785 13.90%
ERIE 15760 1.60%
ACL 14477 44.71%
SLSF 13049 23.73%
GTW 12979 0.51%
SAL 12559 34.96%
NKP 11684 2.16%
RDG 11432 0.57%
TP 11318 16.01%
WAB 10979 0.92%
SOO 10353 16.14%
GMO 9004 43.71%
FEC 8873 9.67%
CNJ 7973 0.89%
MKT 6975 2.51%
LV 6437 2.01%
CG 6022 52.45%
NW 5590 13.65%
DRGW 4895 9.21%
CMO 4772 7.58%
DLW 4730 0.88%
MP (IGN) 4475 1.69%
SSW 4242 32.56%
MON 3634 2.16%
CGW 3450 2.90%
FWD 3342 0.07%
KCS 3332 29.21%
CS 3329 0.20%
LA 3325 48.04%
SPS 3184 72.87%
NCStL 3161 30.59%
SOU (CNOTP) 3143 7.36%
MP (GCL) 2880 10.45%
PRSL 2744 0.16%
MStL 2660 0.29%
DH 2456 4.64%
WM 2379 10.85%
DTI 2305 0.91%
CEI 2222 0.72%
EJE 2203 0.96%
WP 2062 7.72%
NWP 1974 78.71%
PLE 1680 0.36%
MEC 1625 23.16%
MV 1538 0.29%
ACY 1475 0.23%
SI 1471 5.37%
NYSW 1426 0.28%
SOU (AGS) 1374 23.51%
DSSA 1321 69.70%
TM 1287 0.00%
AA 1256 0.77%
CRR 921 4.53%
VGN 898 23.21%
DTS 878 0.00%
SOU (NONE) 835 25.20%
PWV 805 0.12%
OW 777 0.83%
SN 768 0.31%
GF 727 5.89%
SOU (GSF) 717 18.22%
SLSF (Texas) 713 0.00%
BLE 696 0.08%
NS 681 32.14%
DMIR 647 4.53%
AWP 647 18.96%
CV 635 6.18%
CRP 619 0.00%
GA 605 25.70%
TPW 596 2.37%
TC 560 17.49%
ITC 485 2.55%
LNE 460 0.74%
OKCAA 450 0.17%
WRA 422 31.81%
C&G 407 9.41%
RFP 404 3.51%
DM 396 0.66%
CIM 390 0.00%
SIR 374 0.00%
CWC 340 9.43%
GBW 335 0.32%
LSI 314 67.48%
MI 306 0.00%
KOG 303 0.00%
R 291 0.00%
M 287 0.00%
MGA 236 0.00%
ASAB 184 0.00%
BAR 157 39.15%
CN (NE) 134 0.00%
CW 107 0.00%
CP(VT) 107 0.00%
AD 106 9.17%
LHR 95 0.00%
CP(Me) 59 21.30%
PS 44 0.00%
DWP 32 2.98%
MSC 22 30.34%
TN 10 0.00%
UTAH 3 0.00%



Total 954,886

Regards,

Charles Hostetler

Washington, Ill.



Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Origination of Loads

Charles Hostetler
 

These are the carloads originating on each Class 1 carrier in 1952 (again for lumber, shingles, and lath).  I sorted the data in descending order by carrier.  The column labeled "% on line" shows the percentage of originations that remained on line; while 100% - % on Line would have been handled off to connecting carriers.  The SP for example, originated 197,052 carloads in 1952 (almost 25% of the national total!) and of these 19.3 % were delivered to consignees on the SP while 80.7% were interchanged with other carriers before delivery.  If you know a little bit about railroad geography you can see the battle playing out between Southern Yellow Pine and Douglas Fir...


Carrier Originations % on Line
SP 197052 19.3%
UP 42340 22.1%
SPS 41694 5.6%
NWP 41448 3.7%
GN 41034 25.6%
NP 40408 21.1%
ACL 33240 19.5%
SOU 33147 29.5%
IC 31158 50.7%
MILW 28053 30.5%
LN 24411 40.8%
CG 23666 13.3%
SAL 20271 21.7%
MP 19681 50.2%
GMO 14801 26.6%
ATSF 13991 44.2%
SLSF 7823 39.6%
CO 6887 23.9%
PRR 6809 45.3%
GA 6304 2.5%
RI 6192 32.9%
TNO 6013 38.8%
NYC 6010 31.7%
TP 5434 33.4%
DSSA 5193 17.7%
NW 5015 15.2%
CNW 4675 63.8%
NS 4434 4.9%
BO 4383 41.2%
LA 4214 37.9%
NCStL 4032 24.0%
SSW 3822 36.1%
KCS 3615 26.9%
MEC 3521 10.7%
GF 3381 1.3%
BM 3381 35.6%
SOO 3223 51.8%
WP 3112 5.1%
SOU (GSF) 2984 4.4%
CWC 2854 1.1%
SOU (AGS) 2697 12.0%
WRA 2251 6.0%
CBQ 2040 49.0%
DRGW 1921 23.5%
SI 1913 4.1%
SOU (CNOTP) 1728 13.4%
MSC 1500 0.4%
ERIE 1308 19.3%
VGN 1251 16.6%
WM 1233 20.9%
CMO 1200 30.1%
DH 1198 9.5%
SOU (NONE) 1093 19.2%
MP (GCL) 1092 27.6%
CRR 1026 4.1%
AWP 980 12.5%
BAR 942 6.5%
TC 937 10.5%
FEC 904 94.9%
CN (NE) 832 0.0%
LV 811 16.0%
NKP 799 31.6%
C&G 733 5.2%
LSI 732 28.9%
CNJ 675 10.5%
AD 647 1.5%
SN 623 0.4%
WAB 514 19.6%
MP (IGN) 501 15.1%
OW 455 1.4%
DLW 435 9.6%
CV 428 9.2%
MKT 427 40.9%
NH 333 47.3%
CEI 317 5.0%
CGW 300 33.4%
MI 286 0.0%
MON 250 31.4%
RFP 231 6.1%
RDG 224 29.3%
ASAB 223 0.0%
DMIR 209 14.0%
LIRR 190 4.5%
R 184 0.0%
GTW 155 43.1%
CP(VT) 122 0.0%
DTS 104 0.0%
ITC 90 13.8%
MStL 69 11.3%
DWP 61 1.5%
PLE 59 10.2%
CS 59 11.2%
AA 53 18.2%
DM 52 5.0%
EJE 49 42.8%
CP(Me) 43 28.9%
DTI 43 48.8%
GBW 43 2.5%
CIM 39 0.0%
CW 38 0.0%
TPW 33 42.6%
BLE 27 2.1%
MV 23 19.1%
OKCAA 22 3.4%
PWV 20 4.8%
ACY 19 18.3%
PRSL 18 23.8%
SLSF (Texas) 17 0.0%
TM 15 0.0%
PS 14 0.0%
NYSW 10 39.1%
CRP 10 0.0%
FWD 7 33.5%
LNE 7 51.8%
MGA 5 0.0%
SIR 3 0.0%
KOG 1 0.0%
TN 1 0.0%



Total 799,609


Regards,

Charles Hostetler
Washington Ill.



Lumber Shipments in 1952 - Carloads Handled by Class 1 Carrier

Charles Hostetler
 

The ICC published a set of statistics for Class 1 Carriers called "Freight Commodity Statistics".  Unlike the 1% Carload Waybill Survey, these statistics were totals for the year.  There is a lot less information about the commodity flows, but one strength is that you don't have to worry about sampling statistics when analyzing the data.  The following tabulation is for 1952, for the commodity class lumber, shingles, and lath.  The column marked carloads contains the actual number of carloads handled in 1952.  There were 123 Class 1 carriers and only one (the Cambria & Indiana) did not handle any lumber traffic.  The SP alone accounts for more than 10% of the carloads handled in 1952.  



Carloads
Carrier Total <Ton/Car>
SP 273149 36
UP 158449 34
PRR 111769 30
NYC 92411 31
CNW 79284 33
GN 78614 33
SOU 74189 29
IC 72166 31
NP 72108 34
MILW 70882 33
MP 69337 32
CBQ 69266 33
DRGW 62986 34
SPS 60200 35
ATSF 58421 33
ACL 52294 28
BO 52201 30
RI 51483 33
NWP 50539 39
LN 45487 29
CO 41923 30
SOO 40639 31
SAL 36464 28
CMO 34504 32
CG 33493 28
NH 32025 29
TNO 30802 34
WAB 30468 32
NKP 29108 31
ERIE 27540 30
SOU (CNOTP) 27337 28
RDG 27248 29
SLSF 26361 31
GMO 26225 29
BM 26219 28
RFP 24258 27
TP 21717 32
LIRR 21319 30
GTW 20788 31
MStL 18213 32
DWP 17460 30
NW 17333 29
EJE 17107 34
CGW 15755 32
WP 15602 31
LV 15113 31
CNJ 14663 29
SOU (AGS) 13240 29
DSSA 13013 34
DLW 12955 32
SSW 12769 31
CS 12572 34
MKT 11943 32
MON 11326 31
KCS 11040 32
WM 11036 30
DH 10942 29
NCStL 10119 29
CRP 9760 30
GA 9283 27
FEC 8935 30
NYCN 8591 27
CV 8524 28
NS 7805 26
FWD 7793 34
CEI 7579 31
MEC 7531 27
LA 7252 33
CRR 6636 28
MP (IGN) 6575 32
SOU (GSF) 6333 29
CWC 6155 27
GF 6130 28
AA 5596 32
SI 5106 33
WRA 4702 29
CP(VT) 4657 30
GBW 4619 33
MP (GCL) 4549 31
KOG 4503 32
TPW 4246 32
DTS 3807 30
AWP 3439 28
ACY 3437 33
SOU (NONE) 3230 30
DTI 3092 31
VGN 3061 29
OW 3044 32
PWV 2882 36
LHR 2859 31
PRSL 2853 29
SLSF (Texas) 2525 32
PLE 2241 31
AD 1774 26
MSC 1717 30
MV 1645 33
ITC 1639 30
NYSW 1639 30
CP(Me) 1533 28
CIM 1521 34
SN 1480 32
TC 1420 30
TM 1377 32
CN (NE) 1206 25
C&G 1125 29
BAR 1119 28
R 865 29
DMIR 837 32
LSI 837 38
MI 818 36
BLE 737 31
LNE 641 29
OKCAA 489 30
DM 448 29
ASAB 407 27
SIR 405 30
M 287 32
MGA 242 30
CW 145 39
PS 58 32
TN 11 29
UTAH 3 36
CI 0 #DIV/0!



Total 2,691,629



Regards,

Charles Hostetler
Washington Ill.



Re: Early 20th century freight cars

al_brown03
 

Gotta love the flared top on the smokestack, the better for Santa to deliver STMFCs to the model railroaders inside the building. Merry Christmas, everybody!

(Can anyone identify the other freight cars?)

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.



Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?

charles slater
 

One other thing, many cars were shipped with doors open and they were always top iced.

Charlie Slater

Bakersfield, Ca. 




From: STMFC@... on behalf of Charles Slater atsfcondr42@... [STMFC] Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 2:40 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?
 
 

I remember handling box cars of Christmas trees in the 1970-1984 in L.A. when I worked on the Los Angeles Junction Ry. They came in many cars mostly from the north west (SP&S, NP, GN, Milw) and of course Santa Fe, UP and SP returning to home rails. As I remember they were mostly 40 foot cars. We delivered them to Certified Grocers and Market Basket warehouse's. The guys unloading them there would always give you one, you just had to ask. 

Charlie Slater

Bakersfield, Ca.




From: STMFC@... on behalf of riverman_vt@... [STMFC] Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:41 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?
 
 

Chuck and all, 


    Christmas trees were still being shipped by rail from northern Vermont well into the 1940's but had gone
to trucks by the mid-1950s. These were nearly all balsam fir and spruce trees but in bundles of five unless
they were trees larger than the average home cold handle. They were loaded much as you suggest with
8 ft. high side stakes used with both flat cars and gons. Have photos of several such car loads right here
in Morrisville.

Happy Holidays to all from those of us at New England Rail Service, Inc.

Don Valentine


Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?

charles slater
 

I remember handling box cars of Christmas trees in the 1970-1984 in L.A. when I worked on the Los Angeles Junction Ry. They came in many cars mostly from the north west (SP&S, NP, GN, Milw) and of course Santa Fe, UP and SP returning to home rails. As I remember they were mostly 40 foot cars. We delivered them to Certified Grocers and Market Basket warehouse's. The guys unloading them there would always give you one, you just had to ask. 

Charlie Slater

Bakersfield, Ca.




From: STMFC@... on behalf of riverman_vt@... [STMFC]
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:41 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Xmas Trees by Rail?
 
 

Chuck and all, 


    Christmas trees were still being shipped by rail from northern Vermont well into the 1940's but had gone
to trucks by the mid-1950s. These were nearly all balsam fir and spruce trees but in bundles of five unless
they were trees larger than the average home cold handle. They were loaded much as you suggest with
8 ft. high side stakes used with both flat cars and gons. Have photos of several such car loads right here
in Morrisville.

Happy Holidays to all from those of us at New England Rail Service, Inc.

Don Valentine


Re: Optivisor Binocular Magnifier

skyking1084
 

I bought a product called Magni-Clips from a local jewelry supply store. They clip on to your regular glasses and provide 1-5 times additional magnification depending upon model.  AND they flip up over your glasses when you want normal vision.  Well made, I've had mine for a few years and no problems. A tip, they work best on glasses with large lenses.

Dave Latimore


Re: Optivisor Binocular Magnifier

Brad Smith
 


I repair pocket watches, in addition to my N-scale train hobby and do ham radio, circuit board projects.  I used to use an eye loupe, but they are not comfortable for me to use.  I chose the Optovisor, and the eye loupe attachment that attaches and swings down when wanted.  I like the comfort.  I do have several lenses for the visor.  I did buy a great British made LED light for the Optovisor, with 6 powerful LED's that illuminate my entire work.  I bought the light unit on eBay.
 
Your LHS would probably carry the Optovisor set with 4 different lenses, so you can pick the one that is best for you.  Then you can buy the high quality optical glass lens to replace your favorite plastic lens.
 
Brad Smith


Re: Optivisor Binocular Magnifier

Denny Anspach <danspachmd@...>
 

A great discussion subject.

Pierre is absolutely correct that there is no single correct or right response for any or each of us. Inherent eye differences, cataracts, corneal changes/defects, etc., all very common in those of us over 45-50, make one-size-fits-all solutions rare. For most of us, also, our eyes continue to change in this age group, thus making the solution today, a hindrence tomorrow.

I love Doug Harding’s MagEyes glasses without visors (he gave me the idea!), but……none of them, none, will actually fit around my fat head, either squeezing off to drop into my work, or giving me a headache.

I love Optivisors, and have been using them for about 50 years, replacing pieces so that virtually none of them have original parts. For many, the Optivisor shield prevents distracting glare that is not offset by the convenience of looking over the top. However, as my aging eyes need more and more light (the iris -with age- reacts less and less to the extent it once did), and when I pull my great large extension lamp closer and closer to the work, the Optivisor shield hits the lamp and will not allow me to get my head over the work. Very frustrating.

I have long been aware of the various head lamps, LED and otherwise, that clamp onto Optivisors, etc. and which seem to be of the nature of what Schuyler is finding helpful. What are listers’ real time thoughts and experiences with these lamps? Gimmick, helpful some of the time, most of the time, all of the time? Sufficiently bright? Too focused? Not focused enough? Physically annoying? Battery life too short? Are there models to avoid, or favor?

Denny


Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento CA


IM wheelsets

Jon Miller <atsfus@...>
 

    It seems IM is selling a new version of their wheelsets (higher prices of course).  I've only been able to find pictures of the N scale version so far.  Does anyone know about these?  I'm guessing the .088 HO versions look the same design.
-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: Optivisor Binocular Magnifier

Curt Fortenberry
 


In case this hasn't been brought up.  I use the 1.5X version, and without my glasses.  The higher the magnification, the closer the focal distance to your work.  I found the 1.5x is a comfortable distance.  I don't use my glasses now that I have bifocal lenses.

Curt Fortenberry

56061 - 56080 of 195639