|
Re: Photo: CB&Q Boxcar 134010
Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Hi Bob and List Members,
You may be able to see the entire image at full
resolution (without having to click on the image, without
holding temporarily, without having to walk and/or chew gum at the same
time) by clicking on the link
below...
Thanks Bob for sending this out, it is a very nice
image.
Claus Schlund
|
|
|
|
Re: Various Steel Industry Loads
spsalso
The "container devices" mentioned in the previous post also seem to have remnants of guides for lowering covers on top of them.
Ed Edward Sutorik
|
|
|
|
Re: covered hopper grays take 2
Drew M.
I use Vallejo colors. Attached are the two colors I mix to achieve a grey for covered hoppers. I usually do two drops of white to one of grey with a little tweaking.
Drew in Philly
Modeling the pre-Depression years.
Sent from TypeApp
On Sep 17, 2019, at 09:05, Eric Mumper <eric.mumper@...> wrote: Group,
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
Dave Parker
To expand a little on what Steve Hile said about YS&T 110 (and TKX 700):
Standard Car (later Tank Car) Company commenced operations in April of 1916; it was the name change that dates to 1919. Judging from their seminal publication "All About Tank Cars" (both 1919, 1921 editions), I don't believe that Standard ever built any MCB Class II cars, as the May, 1917, mandate for Class III cars was so imminent. Since the two cars in question here are clearly Class IIs, I am skeptical that Standard built them, although the built-up tank bolsters certainly say "Standard". There are four similar Class II cars with "high walkways" in Ted's SEFCRM vol. 2 but, absent some evidence beyond the bolster design that they were actually Standard-built, I remain dubious about these as well. Perhaps there was some "engineering philosphy" associated with these earlier cars that somehow found it's way into Standard's design team. As for Pennsylvania Tank Car, I have seen start dates of 1911 and 1914, both without any solid attribution. There are some indications that they used built-up tank bolsters on some cars, but I have never seen a confirmed PTCCo car with anything like what we are discussing here. As for Don's comment about the Rube Goldberg running board design, this raises some questions (that I can't fully answer) about the safety appliance standards for tank cars. Based on AC&F's transition from the their Type 7 to the Type 11 (in ~1911), I have long assumed that the 1911 Safety Appliances Act banned the "high walkway design". But a reread of the safety appliances section in the 1911 MCB annual proceedings doesn't really support this notion. To date, the only place I have found good drawings is in the 1918 MCB Standards and Recommended Practices. There, a tank car without end-sills (as is the case with YS&T 110) is shown with what I would call "intermediate height" running boards, as per the UTLX Class V and X designs. Cars with end-sills are still shown with the high running boards as an allowable option, but I suspect this is something that was grandfathered back to MCB Class II cars (and perhaps some unknown cutoff date). The MCB/ARA Specifications for Tank Cars strongly imply that anything built to the Class III standard had to have the low running boards and end platforms that we are so used to seeing (and the photographic evidence certainly agrees). This is a long way of saying I don't know who built the two tank cars discussed in this thread, but I guess I have some strong opinions about who didn't. Contrary evidence is of course welcome, as is any clarification about exactly how/when the 1911 SAA affected running-board design. -- Dave Parker Swall Meadows, CA
|
|
|
|
Photo: CB&Q Boxcar 134010
Photo: CB&Q Boxcar 134010 An image taken in 1931 from the Detroit Public Library: https://digitalcollections.detroitpubliclibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A230469 Click on the image and hold to temporarily enlarge it. Description: View of two men unloading alum, via a hose, from a railroad freight car during the construction of the Chemical Building in the Springwells Station treatment plant, Detroit water supply system. Printed on front: "City of Detroit. Department of Water Supply. Springwells Station. Chemical Building. Contract No. FC-20. Building construction: W.E. Wood Company. File no. 831. No. 30. Date: 8-6-31. Photo by Manning Brothers." Typed on back: "Unloading first car of alum; air hose suspended from cable." Dictionary Definition of Alum: The most widely used alum is potassium alum. It was used since antiquity as a flocculant (promotes clumping of particles) to clarify turbid liquids, as a mordant (a substance that combines with a dye or stain and thereby fixes it in a material) in dyeing, and in tanning. Other alums include sodium alum and ammonium alum. Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
|
|
Photo: PRR Flat Car 426837 With Electrical Equipment Load
Photo: PRR Flat Car 426837 With Electrical Equipment Load An image taken in 1937 from the Detroit Public Library: https://digitalcollections.detroitpubliclibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A230879 Click on the image and hold to temporarily enlarge it. Description: View of switching equipment shipment on railroad cars at the Springwells Station treatment plant during construction, Detroit water supply system. Printed on front: "City of Detroit. Department of Water Supply. Division of Engineering. Shipment of switching equipment for temporary switch house from Westinghouse Elect. & Mfg. Co. Springwells Station, spec. PS-110. 4-7-31." Stamped on back: "Manning Bros., commercial photographers. 504-505 Lincoln Building. Corner State and Park Sts., Detroit, Mich." Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
|
|
Photos: White Star Tank Cars
Photos: White Star Tank Cars Undated images from the Detroit Public Library: https://digitalcollections.detroitpubliclibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A168060 Click on the image and hold to temporarily enlarge it. Description: View of cylindrical freight cars on railroad tracks behind chain link fence in front of unidentified refinery. Sign on cars: "Staroline gasoline is better; White Star Refining Co. quality products." Railroad tracks in foreground; factory smokestacks and storage tanks in background. Stamped on back: "Manning Bros., commercial photographers, 504-505 Lincoln building, corner State and Park Sts., Detroit, Mich." ++ https://digitalcollections.detroitpubliclibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A168398 Click on the image and hold to temporarily enlarge it. Description: View of cylindrical White Star Refining Co. tank car on railroad tracks. Sign on tank car with White Star logo: "Staroline gasoline is better." Stamped on back: "Manning Bros., commercial photographers, 504-505 Lincoln building, corner State and Park Sts., Detroit, Mich." Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
|
|
Photo: Chicago & Grand Trunk Livestock Car
Photo: Chicago & Grand Trunk Livestock Car An undated image from the Detroit Public Library of a link-a-pin-era car: https://digitalcollections.detroitpubliclibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A149275 Click on the image and hold to temporarily enlarge it. Description: Man stands atop railroad car with shovel; three railroad cars in front of low building; two boys stand in front of one railroad car; stacks of logs and lumber in background; painted on buildings in background: "Lumber yard, coal and wood, sash, doors & blinds." Notice the interesting trucks. Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
|
|
Photo: Wabash Mather Boxcar
Photo: Wabash Mather Boxcar An image from the Detroit Public Library: https://digitalcollections.detroitpubliclibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A172723 Click on the image and hold to temporarily enlarge it. Description: View of several workmen loading wooden crate into railroad car at Michigan Steel Boat Company. "From Michigan Steel Boat Co., Detroit, Mich." painted on crate. "Mather car" painted on railroad car. Handwritten on back: "Companies--Michigan Steel Boat Co., 1910." Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
|
|
Re: Various Steel Industry Loads
Donald B. Valentine
Definitely a photo beyond our period given the steel I beams in the PC gon #598980. But not that the stacks of I beams have a vertical piece of scrap wood between each of them and along the sides, the purpose for which I can only wonder about except possibly to maintain that space between them for unloading purposes. But what gives with the PC car? It appears to have wood interior sheathing and fairly high sides. Then I note the rolled sheets in some sort of container devices on the two flat cars behind the I beam load. Don't know the steel industry but have never seen anything like these before. Are they something secifically designed for easy loading and unloading with a high capacity fork lift or what is their purpose? Such photos always present more questions than answers for me. Cordially, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
Benjamin Hom
Don Valentine asked: "...what class is the Pennsy #532885 boxcar seen in this photo?" Class X23. Not likely to be mistaken for anything else. Ben Hom
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
Donald B. Valentine
Bruce Smith, what class is the Pennsy #532885 boxcar seen in this photo? Is the roof slope really as flat as it appears or is it just my view of it? Also forgot to note earlier folks, not the sign on the utility pole, "DANGER Do Not Drink Water Polluted" with a bottom line I cannot read but the sign has got to be a first, especially in that era. Cordially, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
Donald B. Valentine
There are several htings that stand out to me in this photo. Since the tank car is the primary reason the photo has been posted let's take it first. Were the walkways for this car designed by Rube Goldberg out on a drunk or some kindergarten kid? I look at the four straps around the tank and underframe and really wonder how well they could hold things together in ANY accident, let along one in which the car was rolled over. Then I not the two 1/2 circumferential straps, one on either side of the dome to help support the walkway. Noting two nuts on the underside of each strap supporting said walkway I presume it is only two boards wide. But look at all of these pieces attached to the four circumferential and two 1/2 circumferential straps. There appear to be no rivets or bolts showing to make this connection. Could it have been done by welding at this early period? Perhaps it's the lighting and the shadows but I am really curious about this in the teens, judging by the May 1913 builders date on the Lackawanna GM class gon. And look at the gon itself! When I think of gons from this time frame the ubiquitous Pennsy G22 gons always come to mind but this Lackawanna gon appears to be constructed like a battleship in comparison! The heavy fishbelly underframe and the number and spacing of side braces shown give it a very substantially constructed look even if lumber is used for the sheathing. There must be a minimum of 15 on each side if not 16. Then there are the strap metal stake pockets bolted to the wood sheathing that always look so neat on some of the early gons. I'd love to find the blueprints for that early gon as it would make an excellent model subject. Then I scroll to the far right and look at the Reading boxcar, all steel even at this early date. This and the gon make the TKX tank car and old Pennsy boxcar look rather puny in construction to my eye. The Bettendorf T-section trucks on the gon lend to that impression as well when compared to the arch bar trucks looking like they came from the local smithy under the tack car. Perhaps a different view of things, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
Re: Question for Al Brown on Southern war emergency hopper
Thank you Al for the info. Did some more research online and found that a company called Rail Scale Models sells scribed wooden overlays. However they are advertised as fitting Accurail hoppers not Athearn. Someone also suggested scribing the lines. Since I have about 15 hoppers of both manufactures I think I’ll try all the methods at least once. Thanks again for the quick response. Jim Moore
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
al_brown03
The TKX bolsters sure look like Standard Tank designs. I wish one could see the YS&T bolsters a little more from the side: that "porthole" in the bolster is a Standard Tank spotting feature.
Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
earlyrail
Here is another tank that looks the same Howard Garner
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
Jack Mullen
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 07:35 PM, Claus Schlund \(HGM\) wrote:
See also the image below, from the Republic Steel collecion, showing ERIE stock cars apparently used for loading pig iron. And when the driver think he safely on the other side
He shouts back down the line to the man and he says I fooled you, I fooled you I got pig iron, I got pig iron I got all pig iron You just can't mention stock cars and pig iron without invoking Lonnie Donegan. Jack Mullen
|
|
|
|
Re: Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
Tony Thompson
Steve Hile wrote:
Certainly during the 1920s STC was far bigger than PTC, and we know that zPTC bought tanks from STC to put on its own underframes. But the early high-walkway tanks we are discussing are not likely to be part of that situation. They seem to me far more likely to be PTC cars. Tony Thompson
|
|
|
|
Re: Various Steel Industry Loads
Cool photo but it’s mid-late 60’s at the earliest with EL hoppers, gothic P&LE and boxcar with the removed roofwalk. The load restraints would be different in earlier times.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Brian J. Carlson
On Sep 21, 2019, at 2:12 PM, Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io <chiefbobbb@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Various Steel Industry Loads
Jon Miller
On 9/21/2019 11:12 AM, Bob Chaparro
via Groups.Io wrote:
Also visible are loads of steel coils, beams and plates. The ends of the flats are interesting. Don't
think I have ever seen that before. Also for scenery the old
track on the left of the photo is really a neat idea. -- Jon Miller For me time stopped in 1941 Digitrax Chief/Zephyr systems, SPROG, JMRI User NMRA Life member #2623 Member SFRH&MS
|
|
|
