|
Re: West India Fruit & Steamship Company (W.I.F.) Box Car 323
Excellent job Lester. Looks very good Fenton
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 7:48 AM Lester Breuer <rforailroad@...> wrote: After receiving a request from a friend I have added a new post for West India Fruit & Steamship Company (W.I.F.) Box Car 323 to my blog. If you are interested in viewing photos of finished car and writeup of build, you can on my blog I have to share photos and writeup of modeling projects on my Minneapolis & Northland Railroad Company. If you would like to take a look please do at the following link: --
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Twenty years ago on the Freightcars mailing list we compiled a list (based on what was known at the time) of likely prototypes for Athearn freight cars I marked with a "*" those cars for which far better/more accurate models are (or soon will be) available (unless you really WANT to model a Rock Island wide vision caboose on a recycled underframe!) ========================================================================== model prototype Rotary Snowplow Lima-Hamilton 1948 -- possibly SOO/UP/CRI&P !! 200 ton crane Bucyrus-Erie? !! bay window caboose SP C-40-4, built by PC&F 1961 !! *cupola caboose ATSF 1750-2200, needs toolboxes both sides !! *wide vision caboose Rock Island, unique short wheelbase rebuilds !! 40' stockcar UP S-40-12, with reversed roof panels !! *40' steel boxcar 1942 AAR 10'6" Soo/IC/DSS&A !! *50' dbl dr steel box ATSF Fe-24 if you don't count the S-corners !! Coincidentally similar to CNW/GTW/MKT/IC cars !! 40' grain loading box UP BF-50-3 rebuilds if you don't count ends !! 40' hicube ribbed PC&F SP/SSW B-70-36 !! 40' hicube smooth UP BF-50-4? !! 50' Railbox XAF10 but it has the wrong roof !! 86' hicube 4-door Greenville !! 86' hicube 8-door Thrall !! *40' DS boxcar based on 1938 GN cars but too tall !! 40' offset hopper 1928 ARA B&O/MP/MILW/B&M/C&O/ERIE/NH !! 34' composite hopper 1943 War Emergency !! 34' offset hopper 1940's AAR many many owners, Atlas makes !! a similar model but it has different ends !! *40' steel reefer PFE R-40-23 also built for NP !! 40' wood reefer PFE R-40-24 but it's a stretch !! 50' mech reefer PFE R-50-6/R-70-8/10 except for ends/roofs !! 50' ribbed reefer PFE R-70-12 !! 57' mech reefer PFE R-70-20 !! 3-bay covered hopper PS2 4740 1968-1972? !! 4-bay covered hopper ACF 5250 late production version up to 1971 !! 40' single dome tank GAT/SP O-50-13 ignoring dome/rivet errors !! 62' tankcar ACF possibly based on GN fuel car in 66 CYC !! 20' smooth container ? 20' ribbed container ? 40' ribbed container ? 40' TOFC trailer Fruehauf possibly based on PFE/FGE trailers !! 45' TOFC trailer Fruehauf Z-Van !! 48' container Monon design !! 40' flatcar Rutland by coincidence !! 85' piggyback flat Pullman 1960-1961 !! 85' all purpose flat 4 feet shorter than the prototype !! heavy duty flatcar Commonwealth cast steel; model is oversize !! 40' pulpwood flatcar based on a rather obscure MP prototype !! Husky Stack Gunderson 5-unit well cars Gunderson Maxi-III gondola canisters similar to D&H cement cannisters !! Athearn cars with no clear prototypes or at least embroiled in debate ===================================================================== *50' flatcar many 13-pockets cars existed but none that !! match it -- can cut down to 12-pockets and !! model MILW road 46' cars !! 25' TOFC trailers who knows 34' ribside hopper rumored perhaps to be similar to N&W cars? !! *50' sgl dr steel box based on 1942 ARA drawings but no prototypes? !! Irv probably took photos of B-50-22, but then !! used the wrong drawings to model it. :^) !! *50' plug dr boxcar based on 1960's ACF but with 1942 ends. Much !! better model was produced by Front Range !! 50' plug dr ribbed box maybe North American leasing cars? Then again !! possibly just a mish-mosh of designs !! 50' DD Railbox by a stretch one can imagine this is based on !! an SP prototype but I think it's coincidental !! *40' chemical tankcar frankly, a mess !! 40' 3-dome tankcar grossly oversize !! *50' gondola a shortened 1941 Greenville gondola !! gondola containers similar to N&W gondola containers? !! covered gondola nicely done roof for a short model !!
On 4/12/2019 2:24 AM, Bill Keene via
Groups.Io wrote:
--
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
NYSW Box car 501 build and paint
Lester Breuer
On Railroad Picture Archieves ther are six photos of New York, Susquehanna & Western Railroad Co. steel box car 501 in the “Susie Q” scheme. Two good photos. Can someone provide the build date and series of this car? And, when did this paint scheme begin and end? And, was the lettering on the dark green yellow or gold?
Thank You in advance for your time and effort to help. Lester Breuer
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
I have what I have always presumed to be an Athearn metal UP
flat car where the stake pockets pop up through openings in the car side.
However, it is a 53'6" length car that someone in the past has nicely
assembled. Is that what you are thinking of, Ben, or did they do
both?
Steve Hile
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Benjamin Hom Sent: Friday, April 12, 2019 9:44 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959 James Lackner asked:
“And did any of these (in this advertisement), ever match a specific prototype? All that I have ever seen is "similar to, but not an exact match to...." The issue with these models, specifically, the two flat cars and the tank cars is that prototype matches are coincidental rather than intentional. This is why you see the caveat “similar to, but not an exact match.” Comments on Garth’s assessments: “Some but not many. The 40' flatcar (a hold-over from the metal kits, by the way) only has a Rutland Prototype.” Again, not an exact prototype, though a good starting point for models as illustrated by John Nehrich, Kyle Williams, and Will Gill in past articles in MR and RMC. Not just Rutland either; keep in mind that the Rutland was under NYC control between 1904-1911, so their freight car fleet reflected NYC design practices. In this case, this would be Lot 344-F and 345-F flat cars, originally built for the Michigan Central, later going to CASO and NYC during the late 1930s system renumbering. http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/caso-482857.jpg The metal flat car kits feature an interesting combination of stamped metal parts and castings, including a stamped metal strip of stake pockets that fit on the inside of the carbody. “Their 40' tank car is similar to SP, WP and UP 12K tanks, but has a lot of problems as it was a retool of their foobie 3-dome tank.” Not the tank car from this ad (the 40 ft “chemical” insulated tank car), which is a further development from the tank cars that Garth describes, which are the non-insulated single and three dome tank cars. What Garth says is true, but these models are salvageable and still the only non-brass game in town for the SP, WP, ad UP 12,000 gallon tank cars. Tony Thompson has a nice writeup on how to use these models on his blog. http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2011/05/modeling-sp-tank-cars.html Plus another writeup on salvaging the “Chemical” tank car model: http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2010/12/upgrading-old-models-2.html “Their 40' 10'6" IH square-corner boxcar was used only by two or three
railroads.”
Specifically, the combination of 10 ft 6 in IH, 5/5 square corner Dreadnaught ends, 10-panel sides, rectangular panel roof, and Youngstown door makes this ubiquitous model good for only three railroads: IC, SOO, DSS&A. This is one of the two most ill-used models of all time, decorated in any paint and lettering scheme applied to any prototype 40 ft boxcars, and some 50 ft and 36 ft prototypes too. “The hoppers aren't too bad.” None of them were in the ad that I posted…but since we’re discussing them: - The 40 ft offset quad is the ARA standard 70-ton quadruple hopper, with details modeling B&O Class W-2. It has not aged well, and the operating doors are especially overscale and toylike. It is the second of the two most ill-used models of all time, decorated in any hopper paint and lettering scheme and copied by many other manufacturers (Tyco, Rivarossi/Roco/AHM/Mehano, Cox/Bachmann) who offered even more bogus schemes. (There are actually quite a few legitimate paint schemes for these cars.) - The three twin hopper models were actually introduced in the early 1970s, making them latecomers in the Blue Box line. The offset twin is probably the nicest model in the Blue Box line; the composite twin is nice with the exception of reusing the offset model’s tooling for the interior, resulting in interiors that make absolutely no sense; the 7-side post model is a foobie that coincidentally is close to similar PRR and Virginian prototypes. It also suffers from reusing the offset model’s interior. Bill Keene asked: “Wasn't Athearn's stock car based upon a Union Pacific prototype?” Garth replied: “Supposedly, but I understand it is so bad that I didn't mention same. I seem to remember the roof panels are backwards.” UP Class S-40-12. https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Union-Pacific/UP-Freight-Cars/i-VCQBnhr/A The roof is the biggest issue – the diagonal panels are the mirror image of the prototype. Otherwise, it’s actually not too bad. Notes on other cars in the ad: - The derrick and work caboose are imagineered models to reuse the tooling for the 40 ft flatcar. - The containers on the frozen food gon are legit models of refrigerated containers, N&W IIRC. - The TOFC flat is basically a toy, though the trailers are a start for short trailers of the era. - The Auto Loader is patterned after an experimental Evans prototype, but is shortened to fit the Athearn 50 ft flat car. http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/NYC-EARLY-AUTORACK-STORY.jpg Garth wrote: “In my view, most Athearn cars are useful as fodder for conversions” and “Some features on most Athearn cars are prototype, and could be used for slice-and-dice conversions, but you still have to get rid of all the cast-on ladders and such. Often there are, or have been, better solutions available.” There are often better solutions available…but there’s immense learning value from these projects. The plastic is easy to work with; the models and parts are abundant and inexpensive if you take your time and keep looking, and the consequences of making mistakes during the learning process are fairly low. It’s easy to turn up your nose on these models, and going with better models is preferred, but there’s still a lot of fun to be had if you want to use up the ones you already have. Ben Hom
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Benjamin Hom
James Lackner asked: “And did any of these (in this advertisement), ever match a specific prototype? All that I have ever seen is "similar to, but not an exact match to...." The issue with these models, specifically, the two flat cars and the tank cars is that prototype matches are coincidental rather than intentional. This is why you see the caveat “similar to, but not an exact match.” Comments on Garth’s assessments: “Some but not many. The 40' flatcar (a hold-over from the metal kits, by the way) only has a Rutland Prototype.” Again, not an exact prototype, though a good starting point for models as illustrated by John Nehrich, Kyle Williams, and Will Gill in past articles in MR and RMC. Not just Rutland either; keep in mind that the Rutland was under NYC control between 1904-1911, so their freight car fleet reflected NYC design practices. In this case, this would be Lot 344-F and 345-F flat cars, originally built for the Michigan Central, later going to CASO and NYC during the late 1930s system renumbering. http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/caso-482857.jpg The metal flat car kits feature an interesting combination of stamped metal parts and castings, including a stamped metal strip of stake pockets that fit on the inside of the carbody. “Their 40' tank car is similar to SP, WP and UP 12K tanks, but has a lot of problems as it was a retool of their foobie 3-dome tank.” Not the tank car from this ad (the 40 ft “chemical” insulated tank car), which is a further development from the tank cars that Garth describes, which are the non-insulated single and three dome tank cars. What Garth says is true, but these models are salvageable and still the only non-brass game in town for the SP, WP, ad UP 12,000 gallon tank cars. Tony Thompson has a nice writeup on how to use these models on his blog. http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2011/05/modeling-sp-tank-cars.html Plus another writeup on salvaging the “Chemical” tank car model: http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2010/12/upgrading-old-models-2.html “Their 40' 10'6" IH square-corner boxcar was used only by two or three railroads.” Specifically, the combination of 10 ft 6 in IH, 5/5 square corner Dreadnaught ends, 10-panel sides, rectangular panel roof, and Youngstown door makes this ubiquitous model good for only three railroads: IC, SOO, DSS&A. This is one of the two most ill-used models of all time, decorated in any paint and lettering scheme applied to any prototype 40 ft boxcars, and some 50 ft and 36 ft prototypes too. “The hoppers aren't too bad.” None of them were in the ad that I posted…but since we’re discussing them: - The 40 ft offset quad is the ARA standard 70-ton quadruple hopper, with details modeling B&O Class W-2. It has not aged well, and the operating doors are especially overscale and toylike. It is the second of the two most ill-used models of all time, decorated in any hopper paint and lettering scheme and copied by many other manufacturers (Tyco, Rivarossi/Roco/AHM/Mehano, Cox/Bachmann) who offered even more bogus schemes. (There are actually quite a few legitimate paint schemes for these cars.) - The three twin hopper models were actually introduced in the early 1970s, making them latecomers in the Blue Box line. The offset twin is probably the nicest model in the Blue Box line; the composite twin is nice with the exception of reusing the offset model’s tooling for the interior, resulting in interiors that make absolutely no sense; the 7-side post model is a foobie that coincidentally is close to similar PRR and Virginian prototypes. It also suffers from reusing the offset model’s interior. Bill Keene asked: “Wasn't Athearn's stock car based upon a Union Pacific prototype?” Garth replied: “Supposedly, but I understand it is so bad that I didn't mention same. I seem to remember the roof panels are backwards.” UP Class S-40-12. https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Union-Pacific/UP-Freight-Cars/i-VCQBnhr/A The roof is the biggest issue – the diagonal panels are the mirror image of the prototype. Otherwise, it’s actually not too bad. Notes on other cars in the ad: - The derrick and work caboose are imagineered models to reuse the tooling for the 40 ft flatcar. - The containers on the frozen food gon are legit models of refrigerated containers, N&W IIRC. - The TOFC flat is basically a toy, though the trailers are a start for short trailers of the era. - The Auto Loader is patterned after an experimental Evans prototype, but is shortened to fit the Athearn 50 ft flat car. http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/NYC-EARLY-AUTORACK-STORY.jpg Garth wrote: “In my view, most Athearn cars are useful as fodder for conversions” and “Some features on most Athearn cars are prototype, and could be used for slice-and-dice conversions, but you still have to get rid of all the cast-on ladders and such. Often there are, or have been, better solutions available.” There are often better solutions available…but there’s immense learning value from these projects. The plastic is easy to work with; the models and parts are abundant and inexpensive if you take your time and keep looking, and the consequences of making mistakes during the learning process are fairly low. It’s easy to turn up your nose on these models, and going with better models is preferred, but there’s still a lot of fun to be had if you want to use up the ones you already have. Ben Hom
|
|
|
|
Re: Bucyrus decals?
StephenK
Champ had two sets:
BRH-32 Generic Wrecking Crane set in white (also in Black as BRH-33). Champs description: "This set contains SUPER DETAIL lettering for many, many wrecking train cars, including a minimum of two wrecking CRANES and all the various cars used in a wrecking train...all the data, numbers and misc. lettering you need is in this set." HC-299: Bucyrus-Erie Wrecking Crane in white. Of course, Champ is long gone, but EBay is loaded with their decals: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Champ-Decals-BRH-33-HO-Gould-Wrecking-Train-Cranes-Cars-Decal-Set-Black/391829154018?hash=item5b3ad668e2:g:yiUAAOSw4DJYiPk4 Steve Kay
|
|
|
|
West India Fruit & Steamship Company (W.I.F.) Box Car 323
Lester Breuer
After receiving a request from a friend I have added a new post for West India Fruit & Steamship Company (W.I.F.) Box Car 323 to my blog. If you are interested in viewing photos of finished car and writeup of build, you can on my blog I have to share photos and writeup of modeling projects on my Minneapolis & Northland Railroad Company. If you would like to take a look please do at the following link:
http://mnrailroadcab100.blogspot.com/ Lester Breuer
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
Bill,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Supposedly, but I understand it is so bad that I didn't mention same. I seem to remember the roof panels are backwards. Some features on most Athearn cars are prototype, and could be used for slice-and-dice conversions, but you still have to get rid of all the cast-on ladders and such. Often there are, or have been, better solutions available. Yours Aye, Garth Groff
On 4/12/19 2:24 AM, Bill Keene via
Groups.Io wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Bill Keene
Garth, Wasn't Athearn's stock car based upon a Union Pacific prototype? Cheers, Bill Keene Irvine, CA
On Apr 11, 2019, at 11:13 PM, Garth Groff <sarahsan@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
Jim,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Some but not many. The 40' flatcar (a hold-over from the metal kits, by the way) only has a Rutland Prototype. Their 40' tank car is similar to SP, WP and UP 12K tanks, but has a lot of problems as it was a retool of their foobie 3-dome tank. Their 40' 10'6" IH square-corner boxcar was used only by two or three railroads. Their cupola caboose is ATSF and similar to some CRR cars (different steps), while their bay window is SP. The crane matches up to closely to several prototypes. The hoppers aren't too bad. None of these are perfect, and I'm sure all of you are going to enjoy picking my suggestions apart. In my view, most Athearn cars are useful as fodder for conversions. Yours Aye, Garth Groff
On 4/11/19 6:50 PM, James Lackner
wrote:
And did any of these (in this advertisement), ever match a specific prototype? All that I have ever seen is "similar to, but not an exact match to...." Jim Lackner
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Richard Bale <Rhbale@...>
Irv Athearn lead a rather frugal lifestyle, just he and his wife in a double-wide trailer a few miles from the office. What made me remember that was seeing the Cadillac's in the Blue Box auto carrier in the ad Ben posted. They were inspired by the big Cadillac driven by the Mrs., one of the few extravagances in the Athearn family.
Richard Bale
In a message dated 4/11/2019 3:04:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, b.hom@... writes:
|
|
|
|
Re: Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
James Lackner
And did any of these (in this advertisement), ever match a specific
prototype? All that I have ever seen is "similar to, but not an exact match to...." Jim Lackner
|
|
|
|
Throwback Thursday: Athearn Rolling Stock Ad, Model Railroader, February 1959
Benjamin Hom
This is why I laugh when I see panic over the retirement of Athearn Blue Box kits...some of them were in continuous production for over 50 years by the time kits were discontinued in 2009. If you can't find these on the secondary market, you're just not trying. Ben Hom
|
|
|
|
Re: You have been removed from main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
John Hagen <sprinthag@...>
Ya knows, your opinion is always welcome here in these USofA. So is counter opinions. It always amazes me when I see people slamming anything from, in this case, Microsoft. It also happens with other major companies. In regards your comment about Outlook being something scary, I’ve only have been using it since around 1995-96. Occasional glitches? Sure, but nothing of any consequence. Just saying I feel it works mighty fine. Really, the one company I would not deal with at all if it were possible is Google. Some of their stuff on the web that we have no choice but to use does work okay; others I have tried has been nothing but a hassle. But that is a minor point. What gripes me is the near monopoly given to Google by our “servants” in Washington. All of them, regardless of party affiliation. People complain about he government spying on us common folk. Well, let them. I don’t do anything to piss them and they leave me alone, well, at least as much as the other poor peons out there. But Google spying is very deep and very consistent. And they SELL all our privacy to as many organizations who are willing to pay for it. I just read a few days ago about some other way they are about to force more of their self-serving programing down our throats. Anyway, that’s the way I see I it. We now return to our normal programing. Thank you for listening, John Hagen
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 2:11 PM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] You have been removed from main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
|
|
|
|
Re: Bucyrus decals?
Jerry,
Jim is correct, the Tichy set #9310 has text that reads "The Buycrus Co." in text that looks right for the boom of their derrick. The way I've spelt it here is the way it is on the sheet, so you'll have some cutting/pasting to do. The 9310 is white, gothic style text, but they have other options: https://www.tichytraingroup.com/Shop/tabid/91/c/ho_decals/Default.aspx Regards, Mike Aufderheide
|
|
|
|
Re: Grain Loading Limit Stencils
Rich C
Thanks Jerry
On Thursday, April 11, 2019, 5:40:30 AM CDT, jerryglow2 <jerryglow@...> wrote:
I created a PDF of floors an interior walls to print on light cardstock and glue inside a car. Guess I should add some of these marks near the door opening. BTW feel free to use the file.
|
|
|
|
Re: You have been removed from main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Andy, it happens. The best thing to do is to contact an administrator AFTER first checking the web site to make sure you are still subscribed to the mailing list. A lot of email services are doing things that we don't want them to do in the name of "convenience". I miss Eudora so much! I'm using Thunderbird and it's about the crappiest email program ever... after Outlook that is. (shudder) Tim O'
On 4/11/2019 3:01 PM, Andy Carlson
wrote:
--
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
You have been removed from main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Andy Carlson
I received this email this morning from Group io. It said to resume subscription to click there. I have not received any STMFC emails since, though I complied with their instructions. Do I need to reapply to the administration? I have no clue as to why a group email to me was scammed.
Hello,
Because your Email Service Provider reported to us that one or more messages sent to you from main@RealSTMFC.groups.io has been marked as spam you have been automatically removed from the group. We suggest that you check your spam box as soon as possible to see if your Email Service Provider has diverted legitimate messages into it. You will receive no more emails from that group. If this was a mistake, you can resume your subscription within the next 7 days by clicking the following link: Groups.io groups offer several options for controlling how much and what types of emails to receive. See this Help Center article for more information. If this happens repeatedly please check with your email service to learn about how they decide to send feedback reports to list services (such as Groups.io groups). Cheers,
|
|
|
|
Re: Attaching parts to brass models.
I have used epoxy to attach parts to brass with excellent results - including a trip through the
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
150 degree oven to "bake" the Scalecoat paint. I would never trust CA for this application. For tiny parts like NBW I would try either 'canopy' white glue, or diluted contact cement - assuming you can make it invisible. Tim O'Connor
On 4/11/2019 9:02 AM, Bruce Smith wrote:
Jared, --
*Tim O'Connor* *Sterling, Massachusetts*
|
|
|
|
Re: Bucyrus decals?
Tichy might have something you can use in their set for their wreck crane kit. Jim Kubanick Morgantown WV
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019, 8:06:54 PM EDT, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:
try Google? https://zyconmodels.com/oc/index.php?route=product/product&path=12_13&product_id=398&sort=p.price&order=DESC On 4/10/2019 7:52 PM, Jerry Michels
wrote:
I
recently purchased to HO-Scale Bucyrus cranes from
Reynauld's Euro
Imports, Inc and was
wondering if anyone knew of a source for Bucyrus decals? I
want to load the cranes on a flat car (freight car content),
and need to get them lettered.
Thanks,
Jerry Michels
|
|
|
