Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Eric,
Yes, and repairs as well. Repainting could potentially be included in that list as well, but I have also seen many photos of tank cars that were obviously repainted, but had earlier reweigh (or NEW) dates.
Regards,
Bruce Smith
temporarily located in Birmingham, Al
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Eric Hansmann <eric@...>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 5:47 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car) Could a tank car reweigh date reflect some sort of upgrade to the car, like a new tank?
Eric Hansmann
On October 11, 2019 at 3:14 AM Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Eric Hansmann
Could a tank car reweigh date reflect some sort of upgrade to the car, like a new tank? Eric Hansmann
On October 11, 2019 at 3:14 AM Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Tony Thompson
No argument in general, but one point to keep in mind is that even when there is a reweigh date, it may be MANY years prior to the photo date, implying it was a repair date, not periodic reweigh. There are lots of those in Richard’s collection.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Tony Thompson
On Oct 11, 2019, at 12:12 AM, Bruce Smith <smithbf@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Tony,
While I don't have Richard's collection at hand, I have looked through the photos I have and counted "new" versus "reweigh" stencils. The ones that are obviously reweighs outnumber the "new" by 61 to 36. I probably looked at around 250 photos.
Some caveats:
-I did not count builder's photos, only photos that were clearly "in service."
-reweigh cars were cars where the Lt Wt did not match either the build date or the tank test
date
- new cars were cars where the Lt Wt did match either the build date or tank test date - the photos range across many years and types of tank cars -a reasonable number of cars did not seem to show any date with the Lt Wt. -The majority (~2/3) of the "new" cars were not stenciled "NEW" but rather had no stencil or stencils such as MILT (and you know where that is 😉) Interestingly, AC&F builder's photos show either MILT or NEW. My take-home is that my statement could be revised to "a majority have reweigh data", but I am tempted to note that since a number of the "new" photos were of clearly new cars in service, that would bias the count so that over their lifetimes, "most" might
indeed be correct.
Regards,
Bruce
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:10 PM To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car) ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.
Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
Ben de Vries
Thank you Staffan, that saves me money!
Ben
From: Staffan Ehnbom
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 8:52 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’
boxcars The GN car: Foobie! Nothing seems right but wheels and couplers.
Accurail came closer 30 years ago except a fish belly side sill needing
straightening and an overhanging diagonal panel roof to be exchanged. See
attachment.
Staffan Ehnbom On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:13 AM Ben de Vries
<bernjuldevries@...> wrote:
Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
Ben de Vries
Ben,
thank you, I know now that I should avoid these models!
Ben
From: Benjamin
Hom
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:03 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’
boxcars Ben de Vries asked:
"Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially
the Linde and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!"
Bill Welch replied:
"A link would be helpful Ben. . ."
We've discussed these models before in the thread "Bowser Box Cars"
starting with message #143056 dated 6/15/16. Long story short, this model
has been lurking around the Bowser catalog for the last 15-20 years or so in the
guise of base model "canvas" for custom-decorated cars in their English Model
Railroad Supply line. Bowser used their Class X31A single door boxcar
tooling as the basis for a "generic" 40 ft boxcar, creating a model with a
Murphy rectangular panel roof with 4/5 Dreadnaught ends but with the side rivet
patterns of the Class X31A single door car, all the way down to the unique 5
panels to the left of the door/4 panels to the right of the door.
I've got one of these models, but haven't discovered any prototype for it
yet as this combination of features is unusual, so all of the decorated models
are suspect. Frankly, $28.95 is a bit much to shell out for a stand-in
model.
Ben Hom
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Tony Thompson
ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data. Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up. And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh. Tony Thompson
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Jack Mullen
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:11 AM, Bruce Smith wrote:
So, while the first part of Bob’s statement is fine, the second is completely false and does not derive from the first. ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.As I read Bob's conjecture, he's not saying that tank cars wouldn't have weight data, just that they "shouldn't" have REweigh dates and revised weights. Not completely false, but an overstatement. I think the premise may actually be what's incorrect - these cars are classed as XT which is a box car class, not a T_ tank car. I'd expect the normal boxcar reweighing requirement would apply. Jack Mullen
|
|
Swift Reefers
Has anyone published
any sort of detailed roster of Swift reefers? I seem to think so, but
can't locate such. I do have Martin Lofton's RMJ 2-93
article.
Maybe a good clinic
session?
Thanks in
advance,
Steve
Hile
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
Staffan Ehnbom
The GN car: Foobie! Nothing seems right but wheels and couplers. Accurail came closer 30 years ago except a fish belly side sill needing straightening and an overhanging diagonal panel roof to be exchanged. See attachment. Staffan Ehnbom
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:13 AM Ben de Vries <bernjuldevries@...> wrote: Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Dave Parker
At least through the 1920a and 30s, the MCB/ARA lettering standards did not require a LD LMT stencil on tank cars, only the LT WT and CAPY stencils. I have seen a LD LMT on a few tank cars, but it was not part of the Standard Practice.
As to whether "most" tank cars would be sporting a reweigh stencil (as opposed to the original light weight), I think this has to be era-dependent. For 1934, almost all my tank cars have the original, factory-applied light weight, as most of them are <20 years old, and some are <10. -- Dave Parker Swall Meadows, CA
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
OK, I’m a little confused by this conversation.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
FIRST - afaik, ALL cars in interchange service were required to show CAPY, LD LMT, and LT WT data and the LT WT data was to be accompanied by either the stencil NEW and a date, or the code for the scale where the car was weighed (or reweighed)
and the date, including tank cars.
SECOND - tank cars were not required to be ROUTINELY reweighed (but were reweighed from time to time, particularly when repairs that might significantly affect the LT WT were made).
So, while the first part of Bob’s statement is fine, the second is completely false and does not derive from the first. ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.
Regards Bruce
Bruce F. Smith Auburn, AL "Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."
|
|
Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
Gatwood, Elden J SAD
.....but they did. See attached.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Elden Gatwood
-----Original Message-----
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 10:47 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car) As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right? Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
BRIAN PAUL EHNI
Some did.
Thanks!
From: <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of "Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io" <chiefbobbb@...>
As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right?
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right?
Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
Benjamin Hom
Ben de Vries asked: "Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!" Bill Welch replied: "A link would be helpful Ben. . ." We've discussed these models before in the thread "Bowser Box Cars" starting with message #143056 dated 6/15/16. Long story short, this model has been lurking around the Bowser catalog for the last 15-20 years or so in the guise of base model "canvas" for custom-decorated cars in their English Model Railroad Supply line. Bowser used their Class X31A single door boxcar tooling as the basis for a "generic" 40 ft boxcar, creating a model with a Murphy rectangular panel roof with 4/5 Dreadnaught ends but with the side rivet patterns of the Class X31A single door car, all the way down to the unique 5 panels to the left of the door/4 panels to the right of the door. I've got one of these models, but haven't discovered any prototype for it yet as this combination of features is unusual, so all of the decorated models are suspect. Frankly, $28.95 is a bit much to shell out for a stand-in model. Ben Hom
|
|
Re: Erie coal gon
...but it was done in brass in TT-scale!!! A 'Joma'
import from Japan.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Drawings from the '31 CBCyc were reprinted in Train Shed Cyclopedia 46... and an article by Jim Cassidy on upgrading the Mantua HO car was in MRG May-June 1985. Another article was written by Richard Reichenbach in the ELHS Diamond... the copy I have is undated. Original: Circa-1923 Modernized: Post 1937 Richard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Brennan - TT-west www.tt-west.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 07:36 AM 10/9/2019, Tim O'Connor wrote:
Surprising it was never done in resin... over 500 cars in service, and 44.0 feet inside length!
|
|
Re: Erie coal gon
Alice Devenny
Steve:
Sorry, I don't recall which RMC issue had the Erie coal gon article. My quick attempt at trying to find an index on-line was not successful. IIRC, the article wasn't much help regarding the car height problem anyway. Car height is the major issue to overcome - the rest of the work was just some simple detailing. Tom Devenny East Norriton, PA
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
Bill Welch
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 04:13 AM, Ben de Vries wrote:
Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the LindeA link would be helpful Ben. . . Bill Welch
|
|
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
Ben de Vries
Thank you Garth for your very informative message!
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Ben Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
|
|