Date   

Re: 36' SS XM

James D Thompson <jaydeet@...>
 

Listed in a 1925 CGW equipment diagram book is a single-sheathed box
car with an inside length of 36'-0" built by ACF in 1914.

According to the diagram page these cars had the following dimensions:
Capacity - 80000 lbs
Length inside - 36'-0"
Width inside - 8'-6 1/2"
Height inside - 8'-6"
Extreme length - 40'-6 3/4"
Cubic capacity - 2614 cu. ft.
The cubic capacity would make it the 27000-27998(even) series, which
has an extreme length of 36'11" in the ORER. The other dimensions agree
with the ORER.

Were there other examples this early?
Were there other single-sheathed cars so short?
Single-sheathed cars with outside bracing first appeared around 1910
(the Canadian Fowler cars, and Erie had some pre-Fowler ss cars).
36 feet was the prevailing length at that time, and there were many
ss cars shorter than 40 feet built in the Teens and early 1920s.

David Thompson


How long did wood car siding last?

Ashley Rachel Pollard <ashley@...>
 

Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:41:19 -0800
From: thompson@signaturepress.com
Garth Groff said:
The Western Railway Museum is currently restoring one of their Central
California Traction boxcars. It was apparently built around 1880 by the
SP or CP, but it still had some original sheathing (redwood, IIRC; that
stuff lasts forever).
Actually, I think it's a 1910 Holman car, but still quite durable.
Holman, now there is an interesting car company, with little extant history.

BTW did you enjoy your book from Motor Books? :-) It's a small world you
know!

--
Ashley
Ashley@apnix.demon.co.uk


Re: 36' SS XM

Alan C. Welch <acwelch@...>
 

At 05:52 PM 2/27/2003 +0000, you wrote:
Listed in a 1925 CGW equipment diagram book is a single-sheathed box
car with an inside length of 36'-0" built by ACF in 1914. First,
this seems rather early for a single-sheathed box car and, second, I
don't recall ever seeing such a short single sheathed box car. the
legend notes "all steel framing."
When the Canadian railroads decided to "go Fowler" there was such a demand for cars that many were built by US vendors, who concurrently built some practically identical cars for US roads (I recently got a builder's photo of a Fowler car built for Soo Line).

It is quite possible this is one. I would love to see a picture of the above referenced car, but we've been to this well before. From previous posts on this subject, it doesn't appear that the list members have pictures relating to this subject.

Al Welch Esq.


Re: HO scale rivets

Alan C. Welch <acwelch@...>
 

At 06:17 PM 2/27/2003 +0000, you wrote:
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "ed_mines <ed_mines@y...>"
<ed_mines@y...> wrote: <SNIP>
The "rivets" look more like bolt heads to hold a steel skin
to who knows what. If they were 3/8" in diameter the equivalent
would
be .004" in HO.
The smallest rivets I have ever seen in any freight car drawing are
3/8" rivets but 3/8" refers to the size of the shank, not the head.
Can anyone document smaller rivets in freight car construction?

The diameter of a button head rivet is 1.75 times the shank diameter
thus the smallest rivet head to be seen on a box car (if my
contention above is valid) would have a diameter of .65625" (actual,
not scale) and a height of .28125" (again actual, not scale). While
button rivet heads appear to be hemispheres, they aren't. All points
on the outer surface of a rivet head are a constant radius from a
central point slightly below the bottom of the head. I guess they
could be refered to a truncated hemispheres.

See April 1997 MM for more than you ever wanted to know on rivets.

Gene Green
As you say, the heads are spherical, just not hemi-spherical.

The dimensions given in the standard are:

Head diameter .646/.684" (.0074" in HO)

Radius of the sphere .332"

Height of head .271/.291"

Al Welch


Re: Wooden boxcar sheathing

thompson@...
 

Garth Groff wrote:
If you take note of the designs, the double-sheathed USRA cars had a
massive fishbelly underframe. It was made like this to transmit all the
pulling forces through the underframe...
Actually, the pulling forces were readily transmitted by a far lighter
underframe, as the Bettendorf design of ten years earlier had proven. The
deep USRA underframe was to carry the CAR loads. Think of that fishbelly as
the truss rods replaced by steel sheet.

With the USRA single-sheathed cars, the body framing was part of the
total structure of the car. The pulling forces were partially
transmitted through the steel body frame, and so the underframe could be
much lighter. This is the same principle that was applied to most steel
boxcars, though steel sheathing plates replaced the side truss system.
See above, regarding pulling forces. That the USRA design committee took
credit for the stiffness of the body framing of the single-sheathed car is
evident from the design, though that topic was one of lively debate at the
time. The rather conservative RR mechanical community of the time was
definitely divided about the appropriateness of doing so.
The DS car has a 26-inch deep center sill, the SS car, 12-inch deep sill.
The difference in stiffness terms is immense.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Re: etched running boards

thompson@...
 

Tim O'C sez:
Boxcar and hopper running boards are not as thick as on tank cars.
The Plano etchings are .010 or .87" in HO scale. The prototype is
1" thick. So Plano is pretty close. Kadee may be oversize as much
as Plano is undersize.
Right. Adding 0.020 to 0.010 will make it REAL oversize. And those Kadee
boards are real oversize in thickness too. As I keep pointing out, the
etched running boards are only a little too thin. What's really wrong with
them, appearance-wise, is that the ratio of metal to air in the plan view
is way too high. Look at any prototype roof shot to see what I mean.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Re: How accurate is this Rock Island kit?

thompson@...
 

Garth Groff said:
The Western Pacific purchased several ex-RI reefers for ICE service in
the early 1950s. Could these be the same cars?
The WP cars are known to have served the Portola ice rack, probably
running from Reno over the WP's branch from there. It is possible they
were also used to service other ice racks on the WP or SN. The WP also
had some of their ex-PFE cars in ice service. Photos of either group are
very rare.
Garth, were the company ice cars not being LOADED at those ice decks? I
thought the decks were operated by PFE, in which case PFE would have
shipped the ice in their own cars. As the WP cars were in company service,
that is, supplying ice to facilities on line, I wouldn't have thought they
would have a role in the ice deck (except as a source of ice).

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Re: 36' SS XM

tcschc <tculotta@speedwitch.com> <tculotta@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Green <willibecher@j...>" <willibecher@j...> wrote:
First,
this seems rather early for a single-sheathed box car and, second, I
don't recall ever seeing such a short single sheathed box car. the
legend notes "all steel framing."
Were there other examples this early?
Were there other single-sheathed cars so short?
The Fowler 36' design was in production by this time, although I was not aware of any built for the CGW.

Regards,
Ted Culotta


Re: HO scale rivets

Gene Green <willibecher@juno.com> <willibecher@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "ed_mines <ed_mines@y...>"
<ed_mines@y...> wrote: <SNIP>
The "rivets" look more like bolt heads to hold a steel skin
to who knows what. If they were 3/8" in diameter the equivalent
would
be .004" in HO.
The smallest rivets I have ever seen in any freight car drawing are
3/8" rivets but 3/8" refers to the size of the shank, not the head.
Can anyone document smaller rivets in freight car construction?

The diameter of a button head rivet is 1.75 times the shank diameter
thus the smallest rivet head to be seen on a box car (if my
contention above is valid) would have a diameter of .65625" (actual,
not scale) and a height of .28125" (again actual, not scale). While
button rivet heads appear to be hemispheres, they aren't. All points
on the outer surface of a rivet head are a constant radius from a
central point slightly below the bottom of the head. I guess they
could be refered to a truncated hemispheres.

See April 1997 MM for more than you ever wanted to know on rivets.

Gene Green


36' SS XM

Gene Green <willibecher@juno.com> <willibecher@...>
 

Listed in a 1925 CGW equipment diagram book is a single-sheathed box
car with an inside length of 36'-0" built by ACF in 1914. First,
this seems rather early for a single-sheathed box car and, second, I
don't recall ever seeing such a short single sheathed box car. the
legend notes "all steel framing."

According to the diagram page these cars had the following dimensions:
Capacity - 80000 lbs
Length inside - 36'-0"
Width inside - 8'-6 1/2"
Height inside - 8'-6"
Extreme length - 40'-6 3/4"
Cubic capacity - 2614 cu. ft.

Were there other examples this early?
Were there other single-sheathed cars so short?
Could the inside length be an error? See extreme length.

Gene Green


Re: Wooden boxcar sheathing

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

George,

Yes, all USRA boxcars, both single and double-sheathed, had steel underframes. However, the body framing of the double-sheathed cars was wooden. Sorry if this wasn't clear.

If you take note of the designs, the double-sheathed USRA cars had a massive fishbelly underframe. It was made like this to transmit all the pulling forces through the underframe. The car body was really just a simple wooden box sitting on top of the underframe and had no part in the actual structural integrity of the car as a whole. Since it was made of wood, it was still subject to flexing, and also to damage caused by shifting loads. Because of this, many of the USRA DS cars were rebuilt with steel bodies in the 1930s, and except for ex-NYC TH&B cars, the large GN fleet, and a handful on the SP&S, most of the unrebuilt cars were gone by the early 1950s.

With the USRA single-sheathed cars, the body framing was part of the total structure of the car. The pulling forces were partially transmitted through the steel body frame, and so the underframe could be much lighter. This is the same principle that was applied to most steel boxcars, though steel sheathing plates replaced the side truss system.

Did I get this right, Tony and Richard?

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

gpierson@trnty.edu wrote:

Hello, all,
. . . I was puzzled by references in some recent messages to USRA boxcars having "wooden frames." I am under the impression that all the USRA cars were steel underframe.
George Pierson


Re: Wooden boxcar sheathing

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

George, I think they were referring to the car's superstructure.

I was also puzzled by references in some recent messages to USRA boxcars
having "wooden frames." I am under the impression that all the USRA cars were
steel underframe.

George Pierson

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@attbi.com>
Sterling, Massachusetts


Wooden boxcar sheathing

gpierson@...
 

Hello, all,

Based on a number of photos of boxcars that appears in the books on the PRR
put out by the PRR Tech & Hist Society (e.g., books on Pittsburgh and
Lewistown) taken around WW I that I have seen, there is pretty clear evidence
that parts of the vertical sheathing were replaced when needed - presumably if
they had been damaged or otherwise were beginning to give out. The result is
sections of a car side where the paint color is notably different than that on
the rest of the car. While this is photo evidence alone, I have had this
hypothesis corroborated by others knowledgable in car history. IOW re-
sheathing did not always involve the whole car side.

I was also puzzled by references in some recent messages to USRA boxcars
having "wooden frames." I am under the impression that all the USRA cars were
steel underframe.

George Pierson


Re: Offtopic: USAPhotoMaps

Brian Paul Ehni <behni@...>
 

On 2/26/03 10:32 PM, "Dave Nelson" <muskoka@attbi.com> wrote:

I found some free software at <<http://jdmcox.com/>> called USAPhotoMaps
that will join many pages of map data from either Microsofts Terraserver
<<http://terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com/>> or Topozone
<<http://www.topozone.com/>> into a single map image. No idea how it works
but it's a really neat piece of software. High speed internet is necessary
tho.
In the future, it would help if the platform were indicated. Some of us do
not do windows.

Thanks!
--
Brian Paul Ehni
HMFIC
Bryan, Palestine & Eastern Railroad
"Serving All East Texas"


Re: How accurate is this Rock Island kit?

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Steve,

The Western Pacific purchased several ex-RI reefers for ICE service in the early 1950s. Could these be the same cars?

The WP cars are known to have served the Portola ice rack, probably running from Reno over the WP's branch from there. It is possible they were also used to service other ice racks on the WP or SN. The WP also had some of their ex-PFE cars in ice service. Photos of either group are very rare.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

steve hile wrote:

There are several nice photos of these cars plus plans in the April 1999
issue of Mainline Modeler. They were close contemporaries of the PFE
R-30-12 and could be readily modeled with the Red Caboose kit.
When they went back to GARX, only the reporting marks changed. In addition
to this series (RI or GARX 67750-67999) several other older reefers were
sold and leased back.
The RI repurchased 16 of the cars in 1950 for company ice service and only
one car in the series remained in 1953 according to the ORER.
Steve Hile


Re: "unavailable" things

SteamFreight@...
 

As I told Rich when I wrote him back privately last night to give him the info he requested, I know the shop did actually call Champ, so I don't really know how things got so twisted around. I phoned Champ myself today, and while one set that I wanted was indeed the UTLX set that Rich can't obtain the yellow ink for, the other set was indeed in stock. So I'm getting the one set from Champ, and the UTLX set from Steve Hile's existing stock.

Ron Hildebrand

There seem to be plenty of employees in hobby stores
(and bookstores) who find it simpler to lie than take an order.

Tony Thompson


Re: How accurate is this Rock Island kit?

Guy Wilber
 

In a message dated 2/27/03 4:04:48 AM Pacific Standard Time,
ggg9y@virginia.edu writes:

<< The Western Pacific purchased several ex-RI reefers for ICE service in
the early 1950s. Could these be the same cars? >>

Garth,

The ROCK ISLAND cars WP purchased for ice service were of an earlier vintage.
They were equipped with truss rod underframes.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Sparks, Nevada


"unavailable" things

thompson@...
 

Rich Meyer offered:
Ron, you make it sound like all our tank car sets are out of production.
See my notes above. Which one did someone's dealer say was not available???
Too many dealers, and modelers are making "blanket statements" about Champ
Decals, without knowing any of the facts.
Sounds like the book business. It's a rare week I don't get a call from
someone who has been told one of our titles is "out of print" or
"unavailable" or even that Signature Press is "out of business." Of course,
I fill their order. There seem to be plenty of employees in hobby stores
(and bookstores) who find it simpler to lie than take an order.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Re: How long did wood car siding last?

thompson@...
 

Chris Barkan said:
I am surprised that Al W. has not chimed in on this one. I recall him once
telling me that standard practice was to resheath cars about every 7 years.
That would be amazing. When PFE was drowning in a flood of money and
spent plenty on their cars, they only PAINTED every 7 years.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Re: How long did wood car siding last?

thompson@...
 

Garth Groff said:
The Western Railway Museum is currently restoring one of their Central
California Traction boxcars. It was apparently built around 1880 by the
SP or CP, but it still had some original sheathing (redwood, IIRC; that
stuff lasts forever).
Actually, I think it's a 1910 Holman car, but still quite durable.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history

171821 - 171840 of 187869