Date   

Re: Branchline /atlas parts

Bill Welch
 

Brian, to the extent this will help you here is the email address for the person at Alas I have found to be helpful: Steve Millenbach—smillenbach@.... I think his role is Customer Relations and he helped me ID stock numbers for Undec. 40-foot boxcar kits.

Bill Welch


On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:30 am, Brian Carlson wrote:
Does anyone know if Atlas sells parts for the branchline postwar Box cars. I had a mishap and need to replace some parts.

Brian J. Carlson


Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

Nelson Moyer
 

The 1911 law must have been amended or annulled at some point, because the converted boxcars had neither end platform or cupola, and they operated in Iowa based upon photographic evidence. This thread would be of interest to the CBQ group, where many former Q employees are members. It would be interesting to hear their first hand experiences.

 

Nelson Moyer

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dennis Storzek
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 2:52 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

 

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 09:19 am, Nelson Moyer wrote:

I’m pretty sure that Iowa did not ban side door waycars in any form.

But they did require end platforms. This link should take you to the announcement of the 1911 law:
Caboose Cars

I was also interested to learn that Lorenzo S. Coffin, the railroad safety crusader from the late nineteenth century, was an Iowa state railroad commissioner.

Dennis Storzek

 

 


Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

Dennis Storzek
 

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 09:19 am, Nelson Moyer wrote:

I’m pretty sure that Iowa did not ban side door waycars in any form.

But they did require end platforms. This link should take you to the announcement of the 1911 law:
Caboose Cars

I was also interested to learn that Lorenzo S. Coffin, the railroad safety crusader from the late nineteenth century, was an Iowa state railroad commissioner.

Dennis Storzek

 

 


Re: Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

al_brown03
 

True Line Trains did *both* CN and CP versions, and their 'Web site discusses the physical differences. 

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


Re: Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

Richard Townsend
 

Go to their website: http://www.truelinetrains.ca/freight-cars/ho---8-hatch-reefer

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: Armand Premo <arm.p.prem@...>
To: main <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, May 23, 2018 11:14 am
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

Which one did True Line trains do ?Armand Premo

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Pierre Oliver <pierre.oliver@...> wrote:
Bob,
Starting in RMC Dec, 1995, for 3 parts, Stafford Swain wrote an in depth series of articles on all the variations of Canadian built 8 hatch reefers.
The distinctions are subtle, but the articles provide  lots of charts to help you figure out what is what
Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 5/23/18 11:45 AM, Bob Chaparro wrote:
An brief article on the history of these cars, along with a more lengthy description on kit-bashing one, appeared in the November 1983 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman. A drawing of the car appeared in the November 1964 issue of Model Railroader.
From the RMC article I gathered that the eight hatch Canadian Pacific reefers were a bit different than the CN reefers.
Does anyone know how these Canadian Pacific reefers differed?
Thanks.
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA



Re: Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

Pierre Oliver
 

I have no idea

Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 5/23/18 2:11 PM, Armand Premo wrote:

Which one did True Line trains do ?Armand Premo

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Pierre Oliver <pierre.oliver@...> wrote:

Bob,

Starting in RMC Dec, 1995, for 3 parts, Stafford Swain wrote an in depth series of articles on all the variations of Canadian built 8 hatch reefers.
The distinctions are subtle, but the articles provide  lots of charts to help you figure out what is what

Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 5/23/18 11:45 AM, Bob Chaparro wrote:

An brief article on the history of these cars, along with a more lengthy description on kit-bashing one, appeared in the November 1983 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman. A drawing of the car appeared in the November 1964 issue of Model Railroader.

From the RMC article I gathered that the eight hatch Canadian Pacific reefers were a bit different than the CN reefers.

Does anyone know how these Canadian Pacific reefers differed?

Thanks.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA





Re: Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

Armand Premo
 

Which one did True Line trains do ?Armand Premo

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Pierre Oliver <pierre.oliver@...> wrote:

Bob,

Starting in RMC Dec, 1995, for 3 parts, Stafford Swain wrote an in depth series of articles on all the variations of Canadian built 8 hatch reefers.
The distinctions are subtle, but the articles provide  lots of charts to help you figure out what is what

Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 5/23/18 11:45 AM, Bob Chaparro wrote:

An brief article on the history of these cars, along with a more lengthy description on kit-bashing one, appeared in the November 1983 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman. A drawing of the car appeared in the November 1964 issue of Model Railroader.

From the RMC article I gathered that the eight hatch Canadian Pacific reefers were a bit different than the CN reefers.

Does anyone know how these Canadian Pacific reefers differed?

Thanks.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA




Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

BillM
 

The FEC used wooden side door cabs into the 60s when they began to abandon cabs altogether. Some of the wooden side door cabooses were sold to other railroads so they may be seen relettered and on other railroads.
 
Bill Michael

Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

In addition to the conventional side door waycars, the CB&Q also had converted coach waycars in class CW-1 through CW-6, and converted box cars in class NE-5 that were used as waycars. Both had side doors and end doors. The converted coaches had platforms on both ends but the box cars didn’t have end platforms. Most of the converted boxcars had one of the side windows extended outward like a bay window. The converted coaches had a cupola, but the box cars did not. Some of both waycar types were still on the roster in 1953. Photos show converted boxcars in IL and NE and converted coaches in Il, IA, NE, and SD. Photos also show conventional side door waycars in IL, IA, NE, and SD between 1963-1976. I’m pretty sure that Iowa did not ban side door waycars in any form.

 

For a definitive book on Q waycars, consult The Burlington Waycars by Danniel, Reis, and Douda, published by Mile Post 206 Publishing, Inc.

 

Nelson Moyer

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dennis Storzek
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 10:25 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

 

It may have been the IC's own doing, deciding that a conservative interpretation of the language of the law was cheaper and easier than a fight later on. I googled this issue and some of the discussion seemed to indicate that there was such a law in Iowa but that it had been repealed or amended decades ago.

I also ran into a discussion of what exactly constitutes a "side door caboose." The gist of the argument was that the laws were intended to outlaw the converted boxcars that had no end platforms, just a long step under the former door location. These were dangerous, as they were hard to mount and dismount when moving, and that style did universally go out of existence. Problem might have been some states laws were worded too broadly, allowing the interpretation that ANY door on the side of a caboose was prohibited. I can see these being amended early on.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

Nelson Moyer
 

In addition to the conventional side door waycars, the CB&Q also had converted coach waycars in class CW-1 through CW-6, and converted box cars in class NE-5 that were used as waycars. Both had side doors and end doors. The converted coaches had platforms on both ends but the box cars didn’t have end platforms. Most of the converted boxcars had one of the side windows extended outward like a bay window. The converted coaches had a cupola, but the box cars did not. Some of both waycar types were still on the roster in 1953. Photos show converted boxcars in IL and NE and converted coaches in Il, IA, NE, and SD. Photos also show conventional side door waycars in IL, IA, NE, and SD between 1963-1976. I’m pretty sure that Iowa did not ban side door waycars in any form.

 

For a definitive book on Q waycars, consult The Burlington Waycars by Danniel, Reis, and Douda, published by Mile Post 206 Publishing, Inc.

 

Nelson Moyer

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dennis Storzek
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 10:25 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

 

It may have been the IC's own doing, deciding that a conservative interpretation of the language of the law was cheaper and easier than a fight later on. I googled this issue and some of the discussion seemed to indicate that there was such a law in Iowa but that it had been repealed or amended decades ago.

I also ran into a discussion of what exactly constitutes a "side door caboose." The gist of the argument was that the laws were intended to outlaw the converted boxcars that had no end platforms, just a long step under the former door location. These were dangerous, as they were hard to mount and dismount when moving, and that style did universally go out of existence. Problem might have been some states laws were worded too broadly, allowing the interpretation that ANY door on the side of a caboose was prohibited. I can see these being amended early on.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

Pierre Oliver
 

Bob,

Starting in RMC Dec, 1995, for 3 parts, Stafford Swain wrote an in depth series of articles on all the variations of Canadian built 8 hatch reefers.
The distinctions are subtle, but the articles provide  lots of charts to help you figure out what is what

Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 5/23/18 11:45 AM, Bob Chaparro wrote:

An brief article on the history of these cars, along with a more lengthy description on kit-bashing one, appeared in the November 1983 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman. A drawing of the car appeared in the November 1964 issue of Model Railroader.

From the RMC article I gathered that the eight hatch Canadian Pacific reefers were a bit different than the CN reefers.

Does anyone know how these Canadian Pacific reefers differed?

Thanks.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA



Canadian National Eight-Hatch Reefers

Bob Chaparro
 

An brief article on the history of these cars, along with a more lengthy description on kit-bashing one, appeared in the November 1983 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman. A drawing of the car appeared in the November 1964 issue of Model Railroader.

From the RMC article I gathered that the eight hatch Canadian Pacific reefers were a bit different than the CN reefers.

Does anyone know how these Canadian Pacific reefers differed?

Thanks.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: Branchline /atlas parts

John Monrad
 

The limited number of Branchline parts can be accessed at

If that doesn't work on your browser, type in
BL1
in the Atlas search box.

John Monrad

On Wed, May 23, 2018, 8:07 AM Brian Carlson via Groups.Io <prrk41361=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Thanks but those are not parts for the former Branchline postwar boxcars that I was looking for in my original post.

Brian J. Carlson
> On May 23, 2018, at 7:52 AM, Charles Happel via Groups.Io <cghappel2001=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> Try:    https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1460-ho-tm-40-pd-box-car-spare-parts.aspx
>
> Chuck Happel
>
> The weirder you're going to behave, the more normal you should look. It works in reverse, too. When I see a kid with three or four rings in his nose, I know there is absolutely nothing extraordinary about that person.
>
> P. J. O'Rourke
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Wed, 5/23/18, Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Branchline /atlas parts
> To: "main@RealSTMFC.groups.io" <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
> Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2018, 6:51 AM
>
>
> Chuck Happel wrote:
> "Look
> under Trainman frt. car parts."
> Not seeing them.https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1079-ho-trainman-rolling-stock-spar.aspxGot a link?
>
> Ben Hom
>
>
>
>
>
>





Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

David Soderblom
 

Side-door cabooses were for branchline service so the crew could handle modest amount of LCL easily.




David Soderblom
Baltimore MD
david.soderblom@gmail.com


Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

Dennis Storzek
 

It may have been the IC's own doing, deciding that a conservative interpretation of the language of the law was cheaper and easier than a fight later on. I googled this issue and some of the discussion seemed to indicate that there was such a law in Iowa but that it had been repealed or amended decades ago.

I also ran into a discussion of what exactly constitutes a "side door caboose." The gist of the argument was that the laws were intended to outlaw the converted boxcars that had no end platforms, just a long step under the former door location. These were dangerous, as they were hard to mount and dismount when moving, and that style did universally go out of existence. Problem might have been some states laws were worded too broadly, allowing the interpretation that ANY door on the side of a caboose was prohibited. I can see these being amended early on.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Side-door Cabooses [was Why Transfer cabooses?]

Clark Propst
 

It seems only the IC cabooses we outlawed in Iowa? Don’t think they were considered to have actual doors.
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Re: Branchline /atlas parts

Clark Propst
 

Don’t know what part you need. Consider using another ‘like’ part as a wreck damage replacement? Makes for some fun weathering options. 80% of my modeling is damage control... ;  ))
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Re: Branchline /atlas parts

Brian Carlson
 

Thanks but those are not parts for the former Branchline postwar boxcars that I was looking for in my original post.

Brian J. Carlson

On May 23, 2018, at 7:52 AM, Charles Happel via Groups.Io <cghappel2001=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Try: https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1460-ho-tm-40-pd-box-car-spare-parts.aspx

Chuck Happel

The weirder you're going to behave, the more normal you should look. It works in reverse, too. When I see a kid with three or four rings in his nose, I know there is absolutely nothing extraordinary about that person.

P. J. O'Rourke

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 5/23/18, Benjamin Hom <b.hom@att.net> wrote:

Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Branchline /atlas parts
To: "main@RealSTMFC.groups.io" <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2018, 6:51 AM


Chuck Happel wrote:
"Look
under Trainman frt. car parts."
Not seeing them.https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1079-ho-trainman-rolling-stock-spar.aspxGot a link?

Ben Hom






Re: Branchline /atlas parts

Charles Happel
 

Try: https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1460-ho-tm-40-pd-box-car-spare-parts.aspx

Chuck Happel

The weirder you're going to behave, the more normal you should look. It works in reverse, too. When I see a kid with three or four rings in his nose, I know there is absolutely nothing extraordinary about that person.

P. J. O'Rourke

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

On Wed, 5/23/18, Benjamin Hom <b.hom@att.net> wrote:

Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Branchline /atlas parts
To: "main@RealSTMFC.groups.io" <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2018, 6:51 AM


Chuck Happel wrote:
"Look
under Trainman frt. car parts."
Not seeing them.https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1079-ho-trainman-rolling-stock-spar.aspxGot a link?

Ben Hom


Re: Branchline /atlas parts

Benjamin Hom
 


Chuck Happel wrote:
"Look under Trainman frt. car parts."

Not seeing them.
Got a link?


Ben Hom


Re: Branchline /atlas parts

Charles Happel
 

Look under Trainman frt. car parts.

Chuck Happel

The weirder you're going to behave, the more normal you should look. It works in reverse, too. When I see a kid with three or four rings in his nose, I know there is absolutely nothing extraordinary about that person.

P. J. O'Rourke

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

On Tue, 5/22/18, bflynnd1 via Groups.Io <bflynn562=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Branchline /atlas parts
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2018, 9:43 PM

No I ordered them on the website.
I am away from my computer now, but I can send you a link
tomorrow when I get time to look it up.

Brian Flynn
> On May 22,
2018, at 5:47 PM, Brian Carlson via Groups.Io
<prrk41361=yahoo.com@groups.io>
wrote:
>
> Did you
call them? The parts aren’t on their website.
>
> Brian J. Carlson
>> On May 22, 2018, at 6:45 PM, bflynnd1
via Groups.Io <bflynn562=aol.com@groups.io>
wrote:
>>
>>
Not sure what parts you’re looking for, but I just ordered
some doors and roofs last week and got them in a few days.
If you’re looking for other parts ie ladders or grabs, I
might have some, not sure but I can look.
>>
>> Brian Flynn

>>> On May 22, 2018, at 11:30 AM,
Brian Carlson via Groups.Io <prrk41361=yahoo.com@groups.io>
wrote:
>>>
>>> Does anyone know if Atlas sells
parts for the branchline postwar Box cars. I had a mishap
and need to replace some parts.
>>>
>>>
Brian J. Carlson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

24641 - 24660 of 181233