Date   
Re: Car Types for a Brown & Haley Candy Factory

Donald B. Valentine
 






---In STMFC@..., <wakeene@...> wrote :

Gary,

I would think that cream would be locally sources and would arrive via a motor carrier and not on the rails. I also do not believe that cocoa beans would require insulated shipment. Most likely these are shipped in bags. If this was coming in off of freighters at the Port of Tacoma, these may also have been shipped via motor carrier. Not knowing exactly where the candy plant was/is in relationship with the port this could also be a rather short railroad move. 

As for utilities powering the plant, I will leave that up to those that know the territory better than I.

Cheers & Happy Modeling,
Bill Keene
Irvine, CA


Hi folks,

    My mother retired after some 15 years as the in house industrial nurse for Deran's Confectionary, 
a large candy factory in Lechmere Sq., East Cambridge, Mass. ultimately bought by Bordens. For
me it was a great place to earn a few bucks helping out in the shipping room during short college
vacation periods. Cocoa beans were received at the plant in large bags made of very thick burlap, 
far heavier than what was used for animal feeds when I was a kid on a dairy farm in the late 1940's
and early 1950's. IIRC correctly these bags were quite a bit more than 100 lb. bags and were
palletized as received so they could be handled with a fork lift. Though within three hundred yards
of B&M tracks in the East Somerville Yards there was no rail service to the plant. Thus everything
that came in or went out moved by truck. The plant had a warehouse on Atlantic Ave. in Boston that 
was served by the Union Freight Rwy. and was switched largely at night. Other than a team track in
the Somerville Yards the warehouse was Deran's only access to rail. 

Cordially, Don Valentine



On Apr 10, 2017, at 3:05 PM, 'gary laakso' vasa0vasa@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:


The Milwaukee Road served the Brown & Haley candy factory in Tacoma, WA, a substantial building of maybe 5 stories and there is a partial picture of it on page 43 of A Northwest Rail Pictorial  II using pictures from Warren W. Wing.

 

Boxcars would have delivered bagged sugar and most other ingredients, though maybe a refrigerator car for creams.  The packaging materials would likely also be delivered by boxcars.  Assuming that this or other similar candy factories shipped out to small stores on line crates of candies, they likely would have gone REA, unless a large a distributor needed LCL service.  Flavorings could have moved via refrigerator cars returning for further loads.  Would cocoa beans be delivered in refrigerator cars acting as insulated boxcars returning to their home road?  

 

Would such factories have their own power plant or would they have used the local grid?  It could be a function of the age of machinery in the plant: steam v. electric?  

 

Gary Laakso thinking of candies while working on tax forms

South of Mike Brock



Re: Car Types for a Brown & Haley Candy Factory

Tom Vanwormer
 

Folks,
If look back before 1900 outwest many of the railroads moved beer across the land in insulated box cars, actually reefers without ice bunkers.  These insulated cars had reefer type door and lots of kegs or containers with glass beer bottles and were very common here in Colorado. 

Tom VanWormer
Monument CO

'Bruce F. Smith' smithbf@... [STMFC] wrote:

 

On Apr 10, 2017, at 8:36 PM, destorzek@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

---In STMFC@..., wrote :


Say WHAT?? There was no such thing as an insulated box car (i.e. RB bunkerless reefer) ???

I have shots of wood sheathed steam era Hershey's RB's. The "L" refers to loading devices, which
really came into their own with forklifts and pallets. Prior to that time loads were braced or packed in
such a way to avoid load shifting.

Tim O’

Dennis replied:

Yeah, but Hershey was a huge company, that ran their own car fleet. Hop in your time machine, try ordering an RB from the local railroad and see what you get.

This also emphasizes the importance of understanding assigned service.  While smaller companies might not have the financial ability to buy their own cars, if they had enough traffic to require cars, they might well enter into an agreement with a car owner to provide cars for them. As Dennis notes, RBs would be unlikely to be seen waiting assignment at a yard somewhere, but that certainly doesn’t preclude either their use or their presence.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith            
Auburn, AL
"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."



Re: ORERs

Tony Thompson
 

     Why would anyone think that the ORER is an accounting document? I am sure the accounting people had their own records (certainly on the SP they were entirely separate, interesting in their own right, but separate). The Mechanical Department responsible for the ORER submission need not follow accounting rules, and vice versa.
      BTW, on the SP at least, they were still updating valuation records as late as 1970.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: ORERs

devansprr
 


---In STMFC@..., <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote :

Tim has hit on the most important reason that railroads would care about how
many of each car class remained on their rosters: Not per diem per se, but
ACCOUNTING.

SNIP...

But for me, the point was to find out how many cars were in service after
1950. And it turns out that this is important for a model manufacturer to
know so as to judge whether it's worth producing a model. And it was quite
effective for my purposes, thank you very much.

Too bad the Southern didn't take this more seriously. I wonder what the ICC
had to say about it.

Schuyler

Guys,

You need to re-read this thread - it is getting ridiculous.

There are a whole host of reasons RR's kept detailed and up to date records of their freight cars, unrelated to the ORER's:

1) Maintenance scheduling

2) Corporate accounting for expenses (repairs, betterment, renewals)

3) ICC valuations

4) Depreciation for income tax. I doubt RR's would want to equate this with ICC valuation - the RR's would want to depreciate as fast as possible to reduce income tax. At the same time, they would want higher valuations for the ICC - even if the IRS considers a 20 year old car fully depreciated. From the standpoint of the ICC setting freight rates, I would want the value of a 20 year old car to be a lot more than scrap... Does anyone know if the accounting for these two purposes was different?

5) Property tax - another valuation - at least in modern Fairfax County, VA, there is no link between the depreciated value of my small business assets (as far as the IRS is concerned), and the value Fairfax County thinks should be the basis of my business property tax. And this can vary over states and local jurisdictions. The PRR and CNJ once tried to shift the home of some CNJ cars from NJ to PA to escape the higher property tax rates in NJ - they were caught on it and had to reverse their attempt at what may be considered tax evasion.

6) Car utilization and strategic planning.

I seriously doubt the RR's EVER used an ORER for these purposes. They had access to much more authoritative data.

George's eminently reasonable point is that a major source of failure when using the then current ORER was NOT finding a car, currently in use, in the ORER - that would make life difficult for many. So new cars would be entered in early, cars going through rebuild programs that included a renumbering may be listed twice, and classes being retired may show a higher car count than the useful date of the ORER. I suspect the ORER's car counts for older classes were refreshed based on updates to the ICC valuations (much more authoritative, and why pay clerks to do the count twice?) Car counts for cars under contract for delivery would go into the ORER early, along with rebuild programs that included a change in the car's number. I also suspect the frequency of update would depend on the size of the railroad. I am not sure a RR would re-analyze their entire fleet in full every 30 days if they had over 100,000 cars. I think George indicated that ICC valuations were updated twice a year. But for a private owner with 1000 cars, they could easily keep their totals updated monthly.

George simply pointed out that the Southern's ORER listing of car counts in each entry were not authoritative for the date of the ORER, and that there may be, in various archives, more accurate data. The PRRT&HS may have just received a 500 pound pallet full of such records (a quick sample suggests the paper was being used for tax purposes right after the PC merger), that may support a more accurate count than the ORER's on the dates of that paper.

Does anyone in this group think it would be worth the time to review and compile all of the data contained in 500 pounds of paper? Just to get a more accurate retirement date for a limited set of old PRR and NYC freight cars?

I seriously doubt that the RR's compiling data for submission to the ORER's were concerned about modelers 70 years in the future using the ORER to validate their model fleets. Criticizing the practices of the Southern, one of the nation's more successful railroads, because it does not satisfy modelers' needs 70 years later is the ultimate chutzpah...

Time to move on to something more interesting and useful.
Dave Evans
 

Re: ORERs

Tim O'Connor
 


  > You need to re-read this thread - it is getting ridiculous. [SNIP]
  > Dave Evans

Yes, it is, but I can boil it down far more succinctly.

Someone said the car totals were inaccurate, unreliable, etc.

Others pointed out that for MOST railroads, keeping the ORER "up to date"
(meaning, reasonably accurate within +/- three months) was something they
did. And yes, ALL of the data - 100% of it - published in an ORER is NOT
Primary Source Material
. It comes from other sources. It is transcribed.

Therefore, bottom line, for modeling purposes, the car totals can be used
with a very small risk of building models for a time period in which the
prototype cars did not exist.

Tim O'Connor

Age of Steam Era Freightcars

Dennis Storzek
 

In the recent "ORER thread", the statement was made that USRA cars began to disappear "because they were forty years old." That led several of us to object that the age limit on freightcars is a child of the FRA, and therefore far in the future to the interests on this list. Someone then asked if the AAR interchange rules had an age based prohibition on car in interchange, and I said no. I am now finding how hard it is to prove a negative, but no one has cited an actual rule to that effect, either.


It did lead me to dig out a Soo Line railroad document I have titled OFFICE OF CHIEF MECHANICAL OFFICER - FREIGHT CARS OWNED - AS OF JANUARY 1, 1962. You'll have to forgive that it is one year past our 1960 cut-off, but I feel the data is applicable to our era of interest. The Soo Line was one of the smaller of the class one railroads, and is likely typical of the industry as a whole. It had an easy to understand medium size car fleet (15,000 cars at this time) and rarely renumbered anything.


The document has the feel of a periodic report; likely yearly. It lists each and every group of cars, their dimensions, built date, and two columns for "RECOMMENDATIONS" headed "FOR RETIREMENT" and "NOT FOR RETIREMENT" Here are the pertinent details I gleaned, by car type:


AUTOMIBILE, For Retirement:

11 cars (all remaining) built 1915, 47 years of age

1 car (all remaining) built 1917, 45 years of age.

 40 cars built 1924, 38 years of age, 58 NFR (Not for retirement)


BOXCARS, For Retirement:

5 cars (all) built 1913, 49 years of age

3 cars (all) built 1916, 46 years of age

1 car (ALL) built 1917, 45 years of age

4 cars (all) built 1919, 43 years of age

13 cars (all) built 1920, 42 years of age

7 cars (all) built 1921, 41 years of age

11 cars (all) built 1923, 39 years of age

60 cars built 1926, 36 years of age, but 386 NFR

40 cars built 1928, 34 years of age, but 326 NFR


FLATCARS, For Retirement:

23 cars (all) built 1912, 50 years of age

21 cars (all) built 1913, 49 years of age

40 cars built 1921, 41 years of age, but 64 NFR.


GONDOLA, for retirement:

6 cars (all), built 1916, 46 years of age

40 cars built 1921, 41 years of age, but 296 NFR

60 cars built 1923, 39 years of age, but 112 NFR

40 cars built 1927, 35 years of age, but 156 NFR


HOPPER, For Retirement:

9 cars (all) built 1913-16, 46-49 years of age

Oldest cars NFR built 1926, 36 years of age


ORE, For Retirement: (these are interesting)

50 cars built 1906-07, 55-56 years of age, but 73 NFR


Those fifty six year old ore cars are former DSS&A on the Marquette Range, there are an additional 138 cars built in 1910 that are not being retired. This traffic was totally captive to the Soo (DSS&A) and many of these cars still rode on archbar trucks, into the sixties. It was obvious that the mines the South Shore served were playing out ( the last ore was shipped over the DSS&A dock in 1966 or 67, IIRC) and the railroad was simply not going to invest in new equipment.


The Soo had much the same situation on the Gogebic Range on the former Wisconsin Central, although, since this was joint service with the C&NW, the cars had been brought up to interchange standards.However, the oldest of those cars also dated to 1910, and none were newer than 1919. The joint service with the NP on the Cyuna Range got the newer (1925 and 1930) 70 ton cars.


What does this all mean? Well, one thing I take away is that the general service cars (box, flat, and gons) seem to be dying of obsolescence, rather than age, an an age right around forty years. The cars are too small, and two little capacity (40 and 50 ton) for current needs. Even as they were clearing the last of the pre-WWI boxcars off the roster, they had been buying and building new 50' boxcars in their own shops, and were just two years away from launching into a fifteen year program of building modern 50', 70 ton cars with ten foot doors. The little 40 ton, 40' x 8' IH grain boxes from an earlier era were simply no longer useful.


I also wonder about the FRA age limit of 1974. Knowing that these regulations are normally open for comment and negotiated with the industry being regulated, it appears the numbers chosen (50 years in 1974, decreasing to 40 years in 1983) were chosen specifically because they would cause the railroad industry little pain; they were essentially already in compliance, with few exceptions.


But, of course, that's all in the future.


Dennis Storzek

Re: CofG PS 1

Scott H. Haycock
 

Clark,

This happened to me a while back on some caboose kits. Notify Gary and he will send you the missing stuff.

Scott Haycock


 


A friend asked me to assemble a Wright trak CofG PS1 with roof hatches. First I took the parts/envelopes out of the box. There’s no instructions, no ladders, no grab irons. It this normal for these kits? I’ll like to hear from someone familiar with them. Please!
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa



Re: ORERs

George Eichelberger
 

When did I say “The Southern did not care” about car data?

Now we have posts tying the data in RERs to railroad’s “accounting” practices! As I responded to someone last night, if the RERs were published quarterly and let’s assume it took 30 to 60 days to get updates into print, WHY would any railroads’ Accounting Department use RER car quantity information for depreciation, per diem, car trust data or much of anything else? Another email I received says, if it was published, it had to be EXACT…..really, three months later?

Every page of the thousands of carbon copies of ICC Form 1742 submitted to the ICC in the SRHA Archives have a Mechanical Engineer’s raised stamp and a Notary Public certification of its accuracy. Although those forms were only sent to the ICC on 6-30 and 12-31 every year (until sometime in the early 60s?), the Auditors notes show us the railroad was VERY interested in maintaining accurate information for every change of rolling stock or physical plant, how much it had depreciated, etc. Their freight rates depended on that data.

So accurate, there are “corrected” 1742 entries for errors of $.10.

Setting this thread aside, if anyone are interested in seeing examples of some of the ICC reports and summaries, I’ll upload a few examples. Google Drive appears to provide a URL that lets anyone access particular files. Like any reference we can find that began nearly 100 years ago, I am sure they are not 100% “EXACT”, particularly for information developed for assets acquired prior to 1916.

Ike

Re: ORERs

Dennis Storzek
 




---In STMFC@..., <geichelberger@...> wrote :

When did I say “The Southern did not care” about car data?

Now we have posts tying the data in RERs to railroad’s “accounting” practices! As I responded to someone last night, if the RERs were published quarterly and let’s assume it took 30 to 60 days to get updates into print, WHY would any railroads’ Accounting Department use RER car quantity information for depreciation, per diem, car trust data or much of anything else? Another email I received says, if it was published, it had to be EXACT…..really, three months later?
=======================

The accounting part entered the discussion, not because the accountants needed the ORER (or even knew it existed), but to point out that since the data was being collected for accounting purposes, it shouldn't have been any big deal to have the people putting the ORER update together use the same data, or perhaps the most current last complete set.

That to counter the general statement that railroads didn't care about the entries for older cars and didn't update the numbers. Maybe in some instances, on some roads. Stuff happens. I suspect the ORER was considered of lesser importance than the valuation reports... but the data was there.

Dennis Storzek

Re: ORERs

devansprr
 

Dennis,

I suspect what we are learning - but we do not yet have any proof, is that there is a chance that the car counts for cars in the process of being retired, in the ORER's, if issued quarterly, and if submitted for publication in the ORER by the RR's based on their ICC valuation reports, could be zero to nine months out of date. (i.e. we do not know if an ORER published on January 1, is based on ICC submittals due 12/31, or the previous 6/30.)

Some roads may have gone to the effort to keep the retiring car class ORER populations more up to date than the ICC, but I kind of doubt it, because there is little or even no downside to over-counting cars in classes in the process of being retired (many of those cars may already have been on deadlines anyway - which makes an interesting point of why model cars that the ORER shows were rapidly being retired during the modelers timeframe?)

At the same time it makes complete sense that cars ordered but not yet constructed, might appear in an ORER even before they appeared on the ICC valuation report. NOT doing that would cause problems for at least some clerks, and others.

I would note that the PRR separately published an extensive list of every type of North American box car during WWII specifically to identify where those cars could not go because of low clearances. One would think that data would be updated before new cars were delivered, although the PRR's instructions to yard personnel was that if a class of car (defined by a range of numbers) was not listed in the book, PRR yard personnel needed to measure the car shortly after it was received in interchange and before it flowed through the system.

Specific to the PRR, the St. Louis to Pittsburgh line had some restricted clearances during WWII, and many cars (especially western road box cars) that interchanged to the PRR along that line were first moved north to the Chicago-Pittsburgh line, before being routed into Pittsburgh. Such cars had an Oversize placard stapled to them so yard crews and conductors could quickly identify them. Also applies to empties heading west during WWII. Interesting challenge for model railroad yard crews...

The clearance issue raises an interesting point. I wonder if one reason cars being rebuilt were assigned new numbers was because new exterior dimensions might invalidate such clearance lists if their number remained the same?

When did the modern clearance "plates" become standardized?

Dave Evans

Re: Car Types for a Brown & Haley Candy Factory

Fred_Swa@...
 

Salinas, Ca had chocolate factories Nestle and Peter Paul to name two.  There seemed to always have a tank car at their plant. mostly SP with the S and diamond on the dome.  It was made noticeable the few times there wasn't one.  They shipped in syrup even though Spreckels the town and factory wasn't 2 miles it was so close.
Fred Swanson

Wabash style freight lettering

Benjamin Scanlon
 

Hi


I am wondering whether there is any commercially available version of the heavy 'block' serif  lettering as used to spell out the 'Wabash' name on freight cars ?  I model bits and pieces in TT so decals are not available. 

I see from some posts that they used  18" high letters and at some point, moved to 33", unsure if that was all. 

Regards, 

Ben Scanlon

London, England


Re: Wabash style freight lettering

Tim O'Connor
 


not available from railfonts.com ?



Hi

I am wondering whether there is any commercially available version of the heavy 'block' serif  lettering as used to spell out the 'Wabash' name on freight cars ?  I model bits and pieces in TT so decals are not available.

I see from some posts that they used  18" high letters and at some point, moved to 33", unsure if that was all.

Regards,

Ben Scanlon

London, England

Re: Age of Steam Era Freightcars

John Barry
 

Dennis,

As a current transportation regulator, although for aviation, I can state that the non-emergency regulations are required to have a public comment period and those comments must be resolved by the regulator and the comment and resolution placed in the public record.  That record is easier to find for today's rules with the internet, but the basics of administrative law applied during this list's period of interest.  So yes, industry is very likely to have commented on and shaped the FRA rules.  
 
John Barry
 
ATSF North Bay Lines 
Golden Gates & Fast Freights 
Lovettsville, VA

707-490-9696 

PO Box 44736 
Washington, DC 20026-4736



From: "destorzek@... [STMFC]"
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 5:24 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Age of Steam Era Freightcars

 
In the recent "ORER thread", the statement was made that USRA cars began to disappear "because they were forty years old." That led several of us to object that the age limit on freightcars is a child of the FRA, and therefore far in the future to the interests on this list. Someone then asked if the AAR interchange rules had an age based prohibition on car in interchange, and I said no. I am now finding how hard it is to prove a negative, but no one has cited an actual rule to that effect, either.

It did lead me to dig out a Soo Line railroad document I have titled OFFICE OF CHIEF MECHANICAL OFFICER - FREIGHT CARS OWNED - AS OF JANUARY 1, 1962. You'll have to forgive that it is one year past our 1960 cut-off, but I feel the data is applicable to our era of interest. The Soo Line was one of the smaller of the class one railroads, and is likely typical of the industry as a whole. It had an easy to understand medium size car fleet (15,000 cars at this time) and rarely renumbered anything.

The document has the feel of a periodic report; likely yearly. It lists each and every group of cars, their dimensions, built date, and two columns for "RECOMMENDATIONS" headed "FOR RETIREMENT" and "NOT FOR RETIREMENT" Here are the pertinent details I gleaned, by car type:

AUTOMIBILE, For Retirement:
11 cars (all remaining) built 1915, 47 years of age
1 car (all remaining) built 1917, 45 years of age.
 40 cars built 1924, 38 years of age, 58 NFR (Not for retirement)

BOXCARS, For Retirement:
5 cars (all) built 1913, 49 years of age
3 cars (all) built 1916, 46 years of age
1 car (ALL) built 1917, 45 years of age
4 cars (all) built 1919, 43 years of age
13 cars (all) built 1920, 42 years ! of age
7 cars (all) built 1921, 41 years of age
11 cars (all) built 1923, 39 years of age
60 cars built 1926, 36 years of age, but 386 NFR
40 cars built 1928, 34 years of age, but 326 NFR

FLATCARS, For Retirement:
23 cars (all) built 1912, 50 years of age
21 cars (all) built 1913, 49 years of age
40 cars built 1921, 41 years of age, but 64 NFR.

GONDOLA, for retirement:
6 cars (all), built 1916, 46 years of age
40 cars built 1921, 41 years of age, but 296 NFR
60 cars built 1923, 39 years of age, but 112 NFR
40 cars built 1927, 35 years of age, but 156 NFR

HOPPER, For Retirement:
9 cars (all) built 1913-16, 46-49 years of age
Oldest cars NFR built 1926, 36 years of age

ORE, For Retirement: (these are interesting)
50 cars built 1906-07, 55-56 years of age, but 73 NFR

Those fifty six year old ore cars are former DSS&A on the Marquette Range, there are an additional 138 cars built in 1910 that are not being retired. This traffic was totally captive to the Soo (DSS&A) and many of these cars still rode on archbar trucks, into the sixties. It was obvious that the mines the South Shore served were playing out ( the last ore was shipped over the DSS&A dock in 1966 or 67, IIRC) and the railroad was simply not going to invest in new equipment.

The Soo had much the same situation on the Gogebic Range on the former Wisconsin Central, although, since this was joint service with the C&NW, the cars had been brought up to interchange standards.However, the oldest of those cars also dated to 1910, and none were newer than 1919. The joint service with the NP on the Cyuna Range got the newer (1925 and 1930) 70 ton cars.

What does this all mean? Well, one thing I take away is that the general service cars (box, flat, and gons) seem to be dying of obsolescence, rather than age, an an age right around forty years. The ca! rs are too small, and two little capacity (40 and 50 ton) for current needs. Even as they were clearing the last of the pre-WWI boxcars off the roster, they had been buying and building new 50' boxcars in their own shops, and were just two years away from launching into a fifteen year program of building modern 50', 70 ton cars with ten foot doors. The little 40 ton, 40' x 8' IH grain boxes from an earlier era were simply no longer useful.

I also wonder about the FRA age limit of 1974. Knowing that these regulations are normally open for comment and negotiated with the industry being regulated, it appears the numbers chosen (50 years in 1974, decreasing to 40 years in 1983) were chosen specifically because they would cause the railroad industry little pain; they were essentially already in compliance, with few exceptions.

But, of course, that's all in the future.

Dennis Storzek


Re: ORERs

railsnw@...
 

Hi Ike,

I'd be interested in seeing examples of the forms sent to the ICC.

Rich Wilkens

Re: Wabash style freight lettering

Allen Ferguson
 

Re: Car Types for a Brown & Haley Candy Factory

James E Kubanick
 

During the early-mid 1950's I lived near the D.L.Clark Company, makers of the Clark Bar and located on Pittsburgh's North Side.. At that time, I would often see some very colorful cars coming out of PRR's Island Avenue yard, destined for this plant, a short distance away. There were Baker's Chocolate insulated tank cars dressed in white and Baker's logo, and two bay covered hoppers painted in Jack Frost Sugars  blue and white colors and their logo.

The plant, itself, was an interesting structure as their siding off the PRR was on the second story and crossed a local street on a girder bridge that went directly into the plant.

Jim Kubanick
Morgantown




On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 10:31 PM, "Fred_Swa@... [STMFC]" wrote:


 
Salinas, Ca had chocolate factories Nestle and Peter Paul to name two.  There seemed to always have a tank car at their plant. mostly SP with the S and diamond on the dome.  It was made noticeable the few times there wasn't one.  They shipped in syrup even though Spreckels the town and factory wasn't 2 miles it was so close.
Fred Swanson


Re: Car Types for a Brown & Haley Candy Factory

Tony Thompson
 

Jim Kubanick wrote:

 
During the early-mid 1950's I lived near the D.L.Clark Company, makers of the Clark Bar and located on Pittsburgh's North Side.

   Ah yes, makers of the Clark Bar, one of my very favorite candy bars. And of course very associated with Pittsburgh for me.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Packing Journal Boxes

rwitt_2000
 

We often discuss the topic of journals, etc. here is a PRR document ca. 1944 describing how to pack them. It seems to cover most of the typical journal sizes.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/192155761671?ul_noapp=true


Bob Witt



Re: Car Types for a Brown & Haley Candy Factory

Rob M.
 

In the CASO freight consist spreadsheets posted last year were two boxcars with products that appear to be destined for Wilbur Chocolates in Lititz PA: 

Interesting cars, the NKP was an uncommon ACF lightweight car and the MILW the common Milwaukee road Howe truss single sheathed car.  


NKP 20256 B 31 TONS DAIRY PRODUCTS TOLEDO AIR LINE JCT. COLLINWOOD LITITZ 8-Aug-44
CMStP 706052 B 30 TONS SUGAR TOLEDO AIR LINE JCT
ELYRIA LITITZ 9-Nov-44  

Rob Mondichak