Date   
Re: Piedmont & Northern 1101 Styrene and Resin Build Part One

Donald B. Valentine
 

   Thank you Steve Hile not only for coming up with the reporting marks and car number that I could not quite make out but also for the reference to a great site for freight car photos. I've just spent an hour in that treasure trove and felt like a kid in a candy store.
Hard to find that many photos from the late 1940's to the mid 1950's in one place today. What a super site!

Cordially, Don Valentine

Re: Piedmont & Northern 1101 Styrene and Resin Build Part One

Bill Welch
 

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 05:46 PM, Schleigh Mike wrote:
 
Hello Group!
 
The P&N 1101 car is surely an intriguing car and Bill is doing a nice job on the model as his reported work already attests.
 
I have handy at the moment only my October 1958 ORER and these cars therein are listed as PN 1100-1124, 15 cars.  Helpfully, the "vacant" numbers are also listed.  These are the only cars listed for the P&N.  However, another note indicates, "Freight cars owned are not used in interchange service."  This being the case, it would seem likely that these 15 cars were for on-line LCL service and not ever found off-line unless for some other dedicated (return when empty to PN Ry.) service.  Is there any objective evidence that these cars did go off-line?  If not, does such reality quench interest in modeling such a car?  Obviously, this is not an issue with one modeling the P&N.  Of course, in an earlier time, perhaps these cars were out there roaming.  Is this known?
 
Regards from Grove City, Penna.    Mike Schleigh
 
I could care less if the real thing interchanged. Model RR'ing is play for me.
Bill Welch

Re: 3/4 improved dreadnaught endo for a 10'-0" IH boxcar

Greg Martin
 

Exactly Tony and I believe they offer it as a separate part.

It was always on Richard list of purpose project we developed over Labor Day weekend and it has yet to be offered... go figure.

Greg Martin


Why Yes I have done some modeling...

Sent from AOL Desktop

In a message dated 8/26/2019 5:49:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, tony@... writes:



Isn’t that the end on the IM 12-panel box car?
Tony Thompson 



On Aug 26, 2019, at 4:58 PM, O Fenton Wells <srrfan1401@...> wrote:

Does anyone make such a product?
Fenton Wells

--
Hey Boss,


Somehow I got deleted from this group in late May. I guess someone didn't like me. Jail is a lonely place.

Greg Martin 

Re: Terms For Freight Car Parts

Greg Martin
 

You know everytime this subject comes up, and it does seem to be often (perhaps because I loathe it) I ask myself how does this improve/enhance my modeling?

I respect the use of the terms -- proper -- but when I am talking shop with the crew models terms see to mean and the use of the terms really don't improve the finished model. When I give a clinic I try to focus on the proper, likely because schools in.

Greg Martin



Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: "Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io" <chiefbobbb@...>
Date: 8/24/19 11:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Terms For Freight Car Parts

Well, your dissertation on the word "proper" is all well and good.

But I never used the word "proper" nor did anyone else in this discussion to date. But I do get your point.

I already knew the Master Car Builders preferred running board(s). Maybe somebody else has an authoritative reference for roof walk. (Athearn doesn't count.)

Sill step vs. stirrup I wasn't so certain about and you appear to have a strong reference source.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


--
Hey Boss,


Somehow I got deleted from this group in late May. I guess someone didn't like me. Jail is a lonely place.

Greg Martin 

Re: Terms For Freight Car Parts

Randy Hammill
 

Some of us are more OCD than others. 

I agree in terms of it improving your modeling, other than using consistent terms helps ensure we are talking about the same thing. But part of being a prototype modeler for me is learning about the prototype, and while in times past the colloquial terms might have been used where access to the published terms was more limited, nowadays there is a lot more information available.

But sometimes it also makes a difference in the modeling too. The RP Cyc articles that (finally) identified and detailed the history and terminology of the different offset hopper variations is a huge help in modeling the variations accurately. 

Sometimes terms are non-industry standard, like “post-war box car” which is generally understood to mean “1941 AAR Alternate Standard Box Car with Improved Dreadnaught Ends,” is useful because there were a large number of cars with that configuration.

But sometimes it’s also confusing. For example, what’s the difference between an “Interim Improved Dreadnaught End,” and an, “Improved Dreadnaught End.” best I can tell, they are the same. One is the actual term used by the builder, and the other an invented term, and one that irritates me as well. “Interim” would imply that it is a stop-gap. A temporary implementation until the “real” end is completed. And it was no such thing. It was an end, that also evolved over time like many other things produced over a period of time. But perhaps the person who coined it had a very specific use in mind which has been lost in time. That’s a problem with invented terms, because the meaning can vary over time, where the published term was fixed at the time of publication. It doesn’t mean that it won’t ever change, nor that there may not be multiple terms in use. But at least there’s industry documentation to refer to.

But in general, I just like learning more about the railroad, and once I know the industry published term I prefer to use that.

Randy 
--

Randy Hammill
Modeling the New Haven Railroad 1946-1954
http://newbritainstation.com

Re: Terms For Freight Car Parts

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Randy,

Tell me about it. I believe I was the one who inadvertently introduced the term "Gould Standard" to the hobby some 30 years ago (to my shame!). I used it to describe the Haskell & Barker cabooses used by the various Gould railroads--WP, D&RGW and MP. I put this in quotes, but to my surprise and horror it slipped into the mainstream and has appeared magazine articles and even otherwise well-researched books, implying that this was an official Gould program. Although the Gould roads did use some common equipment designs, AFAIK the commonality was more a matter of purchasing convenience and economies of scale than a serious attempt at uniformity. In short, there was no Gould Standard.

I wish I had never used the term.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 8/31/2019 9:36 AM, Randy Hammill wrote:

. . . But perhaps the person who coined it had a very specific use in mind which has been lost in time. That’s a problem with invented terms, because the meaning can vary over time, where the published term was fixed at the time of publication. It doesn’t mean that it won’t ever change, nor that there may not be multiple terms in use. But at least there’s industry documentation to refer to . . . .


Randy 
--

Randy Hammill
Modeling the New Haven Railroad 1946-1954
http://newbritainstation.com

SAL "STB" Logo on Boxcars

Allen Cain
 

When did the "STB" emblem appear on SAL boxcars?  Also, what does it designate?

Allen Cain

Re: SAL "STB" Logo on Boxcars

Tim O'Connor
 


They are just a particular brand of "damage free" load devices

      Spartan Loader: SL
 Spartan Easy Loader: SEL
    Spartan Tri Belt: STB

=====================================

On 8/31/2019 1:14 PM, Allen Cain wrote:
When did the "STB" emblem appear on SAL boxcars?  Also, what does it designate?

Allen Cain

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts

Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

Robert kirkham
 

Was looking at the Accurail site, and considering  ordering their 36’ floors and brake sprues to retrofit some non-Accurail Fowler cars I have.    I had some questions about the parts.  It isn’t entirely clear to me that the part #131 36’ straight underframe and detail set is the same part as used on their #1100 series Fowler cars.    The listings are at: http://www.accurail.com/accurail/parts.htm.

 

Has anyone ordered the parts and able to answer whether they are the same or explain the differences? 

 

Obviously, this is a project that will require some part modifications, so I’m not too fussy here.  Just trying to avoid ordering the wrong stuff.   

 

Rob Kirkham    

Re: Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

Eric Hansmann
 

The straight underframe part is the same as the Fowler kit underframes. There are a few extra parts.

Overall the main underframe casting is the same for the three different 36-foot Accurail boxcar kits. The centersill, cross member, and brake hardware parts are what varies between the straight and fishbelly centersill versions. 


Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN



On August 31, 2019 at 12:10 PM Robert kirkham <rdkirkham@...> wrote:

Was looking at the Accurail site, and considering  ordering their 36’ floors and brake sprues to retrofit some non-Accurail Fowler cars I have.    I had some questions about the parts.  It isn’t entirely clear to me that the part #131 36’ straight underframe and detail set is the same part as used on their #1100 series Fowler cars.    The listings are at: http://www.accurail.com/accurail/parts.htm.

 

Has anyone ordered the parts and able to answer whether they are the same or explain the differences? 

 

Obviously, this is a project that will require some part modifications, so I’m not too fussy here.  Just trying to avoid ordering the wrong stuff.   

 

Rob Kirkham    


 


Flat car sides

Richard Townsend
 

Both the Revell/Concor (53'6") and Model Power (50') flat cars have sides where the slope down to the fishbelly begins at about the third stake pocket from the end and reaches full depth between the fourth and fifth stake pockets. Question: were there ANY prototype flat cars of ANY length that had sides like that? All I have seen have much shallower slopes to the full depth.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


Re: Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

Robert kirkham
 

Thanks Eric

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eric Hansmann
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2019 11:16 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

 

The straight underframe part is the same as the Fowler kit underframes. There are a few extra parts.

Overall the main underframe casting is the same for the three different 36-foot Accurail boxcar kits. The centersill, cross member, and brake hardware parts are what varies between the straight and fishbelly centersill versions. 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 

 

On August 31, 2019 at 12:10 PM Robert kirkham <rdkirkham@...> wrote:

Was looking at the Accurail site, and considering  ordering their 36’ floors and brake sprues to retrofit some non-Accurail Fowler cars I have.    I had some questions about the parts.  It isn’t entirely clear to me that the part #131 36’ straight underframe and detail set is the same part as used on their #1100 series Fowler cars.    The listings are at: http://www.accurail.com/accurail/parts.htm.

 

Has anyone ordered the parts and able to answer whether they are the same or explain the differences? 

 

Obviously, this is a project that will require some part modifications, so I’m not too fussy here.  Just trying to avoid ordering the wrong stuff.   

 

Rob Kirkham    


 

 

Re: Flat car sides

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Richard,

Consider WP 50' flat cars 2351-2400 (PC&F, 1937) and identical 2401-2700 (AC&F, 1942). The slope started just outboard of the 3rd stake pocket, actually just about mid-way between the truck spring pack and the journal box, and sloped down to even with the 5th stake pocket. Being 50' cars, they had 16 pockets on each side: https://wplives.org/collectionpageimages/freightcarimages/flatcars/wpmw_8674_022709_DSC_4645.jpg . Chad Boas offers a partial resin kit for these cars--underframe, sides and end sills cast in one piece, with a one-piece scribed wooden deck. You supply everything else.

I had one of the Con-Cor/Revell flat cars, and seem to remember the side sill was very deep, maybe because the the deck rode high, making the the narrow end parts of the side sill taller than they should have been. Model Power? Well, what else can I say . . . . it's Model Power.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 8/31/2019 2:29 PM, Richard Townsend via Groups.Io wrote:
Both the Revell/Concor (53'6") and Model Power (50') flat cars have sides where the slope down to the fishbelly begins at about the third stake pocket from the end and reaches full depth between the fourth and fifth stake pockets. Question: were there ANY prototype flat cars of ANY length that had sides like that? All I have seen have much shallower slopes to the full depth.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR



Two Single Sheathed Boxcars with Spliced Youngstown Doors

gary laakso
 

While at the angle of the picture, the doors seem to be spliced, they could be door and a half.  Does anyone recognize these cars?  The side ladders are short with 7 steps and likely two grab irons.   

 

https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/uploads/r/null/9/1/919547/3d156a5a-8823-4ed0-b90b-f30bc1234c57-A28971.jpg 

 

You need to click on the picture to increase its size.

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

Re: Flat car sides

Richard Townsend
 

I know they are sow's ears, but I like making silk purses and am hoping for a prototype.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Aug 31, 2019 1:50 pm
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Flat car sides

Richard,

Consider WP 50' flat cars 2351-2400 (PC&F, 1937) and identical 2401-2700 (AC&F, 1942). The slope started just outboard of the 3rd stake pocket, actually just about mid-way between the truck spring pack and the journal box, and sloped down to even with the 5th stake pocket. Being 50' cars, they had 16 pockets on each side: https://wplives.org/collectionpageimages/freightcarimages/flatcars/wpmw_8674_022709_DSC_4645.jpg . Chad Boas offers a partial resin kit for these cars--underframe, sides and end sills cast in one piece, with a one-piece scribed wooden deck. You supply everything else.

I had one of the Con-Cor/Revell flat cars, and seem to remember the side sill was very deep, maybe because the the deck rode high, making the the narrow end parts of the side sill taller than they should have been. Model Power? Well, what else can I say . . . . it's Model Power.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 8/31/2019 2:29 PM, Richard Townsend via Groups.Io wrote:
Both the Revell/Concor (53'6") and Model Power (50') flat cars have sides where the slope down to the fishbelly begins at about the third stake pocket from the end and reaches full depth between the fourth and fifth stake pockets. Question: were there ANY prototype flat cars of ANY length that had sides like that? All I have seen have much shallower slopes to the full depth.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR



Re: SAL "STB" Logo on Boxcars

Allen Cain
 

Thanks Tim, any idea when this marking first appeared on SAL boxcars?
Allen Cain

Re: Flat car sides

Bill Welch
 

Based on article I found in the hobby press—don't remember which magazine or date of—I used the Concor flat to create a very nice and I believe accurate, based on the article, a CB&Q flat car. The kit by that time was intended to be in TOFC service so I had to fill some holes in the deck. I installed new sill steps, grabs, etc.

Bill Welch

Re: Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

Dennis Storzek
 

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 11:10 AM, Robert kirkham wrote:
Was looking at the Accurail site, and considering  ordering their 36’ floors and brake sprues to retrofit some non-Accurail Fowler cars I have.
Rob, Eric correctly answered you question about the parts. When you get them, you'll note that there are four cross tie parts, but only three slots. The initial planning for the molds used the old Mainline Modeler drawings of the CPR Fowler carss for reference... and the CPR cars used four cross ties. When I actually had better builders drawings in hand, I came to realize that the Fowler cars built for US roads used only three cross ties, but I left the fourth part in case anyone wanted to use it. You'll have to fill the mounting slots with some strip styrene.

Dennis Storzek

Re: Flat car sides

Donald B. Valentine
 

Actually Richard if you take a trip to the Smithsonian you can see a silk purse that Dupont
IIRC made from a sow's ear. I do not know if it was transported there in a STMFC freight car.

Cordially, Don Valentine

Re: Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

Robert kirkham
 

Thanks Dennis!  Good to know!

 

Rob

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dennis Storzek
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2019 6:51 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accurail part#131 36' floor parts

 

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 11:10 AM, Robert kirkham wrote:

Was looking at the Accurail site, and considering  ordering their 36’ floors and brake sprues to retrofit some non-Accurail Fowler cars I have.

Rob, Eric correctly answered you question about the parts. When you get them, you'll note that there are four cross tie parts, but only three slots. The initial planning for the molds used the old Mainline Modeler drawings of the CPR Fowler carss for reference... and the CPR cars used four cross ties. When I actually had better builders drawings in hand, I came to realize that the Fowler cars built for US roads used only three cross ties, but I left the fourth part in case anyone wanted to use it. You'll have to fill the mounting slots with some strip styrene.

Dennis Storzek