Date   

Photo: Chemical Processing Vessel On Flat Cars (Circa 1935)

Bob Chaparro
 

Photo: Chemical Processing Vessel On Flat Cars (Circa 1935)

Photo from the State Historical Society Of Missouri:

https://cdm17228.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/imc/id/12440/rec/1

Not SSW flatcars, but Erie & Milwaukee Road flatcars.

Scroll on the photo to enlarge it.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: Wabash 7000-7299

Ed Hawkins
 



On Oct 15, 2020, at 10:21 AM, mopacfirst <ron.merrick@...> wrote:

Can anyone shed more light on the boxcar series WAB 7000-7299?  I have two Branchline decorated cars that I stopped working on, partway through.  My recollection is that I discovered something major that was different between the model and the prototype that I chose not to try to change, but I don't remember what it was.

I've confirmed in ORERs from the late 50s that this car series existed, and they were 40' XM with a 6' door, and that substantially all of the cars were in service (quantity in the high 290s).  The model has R/3-4 interim Dreadnaught rolling pin ends.  

What I have not found is any pictures on line.  I have a Wabash (WAB-NKP if I recall) color guide but it's not here.  Any comments?

Ron,
Perhaps the notes column of my Postwar AAR R+3-4 IDN (1948-1954) roster would help to define the differences of the prototype cars vs. the Branchline model. For these Wabash box cars the side sill door reinforcements extended from bolster to bolster, whereas the BT model has the more-common AAR design in which the side sill door reinforcements are shorter and having intermediate crosstie side sill connections. Other visible differences were door gussets (5-sided doubler plates riveted adjacent to the left & right door posts) and vertically-mounted roping staples.


My notes indicate two left-side photos that I’ve seen: W.C. Whittaker photo of 7095 (2-55 reweigh), Paul Dunn photo of 7080 (12-58 reweigh) that was once available from Bob Lorenz. Both cars were built 6-52. 

Hope this helps,
Ed Hawkins









Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Tom Madden
 

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 10:04 AM, Garth Groff and Sally Sanford wrote:
Tom and friends,
 
Walthers must have fixed it.
They did - and pretty quickly. Should have kept my one example.

Tom Madden
 


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

mopacfirst
 

Didn't see that brake shaft discrepancy, but I still have a couple of the unbuilt Walthers kits.  I assume I will build a couple more in the not-too-distant future since they are again the best choice for a 53' or so cast steel flat, after I bought all the Exactrail and Tangent ones that would fit my era and locale.

Ron Merrick


Re: Wabash 7000-7299

mopacfirst
 

Jim:  I agree not enough information to positively identify some of the characteristics of the prototype cars, except that the end drawing confirms it's the same as on the model.

While many of the Branchline models are dead on, I often changed minor characteristics such as the corner sidesill stirrups, or the lack of poling pockets, or adding roping staples, or similar things that could be easily carved off.  If I need to add a sidesill reinforcement or something, I think the Branchline Wabash paint could be matched with oxide red or similar.  Won't know unless I try it.

Ron Merrick


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Garth Groff and Sally Sanford <mallardlodge1000@...>
 

Tom and friends,

Walthers must have fixed it. I have two of their examples, and both have the brake staff in the right place.

I particularly like the Walthers cars' separate deck pieces. It made painting the deck and weathering the flush metal parts much easier. Today I would probably replace the plastic deck pieces with real wood, but I think what I accomplished on my two cars are among the best flatcar decks I've ever done regardless of materials.

Maybe someday I will get around to putting the Southern decals on the back side of one of my cars. (Sigh!) This project got interrupted when I was ill. 

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff  🦆

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:55 AM Tom Madden via groups.io <pullmanboss=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 09:52 AM, Steve and Barb Hile wrote:

Didn’t the initial Tichy molding have the brake wheel on the wrong side of the end sill?

No, that was Walthers.

Tom Madden

 


Re: Test

vapeurchapelon
 

10, but what is the connection to freight cars?
 
Johannes
Modeling the early post-war years up to about 1953
 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. Oktober 2020 um 17:44 Uhr
Von: "Scott" <repairman87@...>
An: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Betreff: Re: [RealSTMFC] Test

Find the magnitude of the following vector.

 
 
 
 
 

10

 
 
 

11.5

 
 
 

12

 
 
 

9


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Tom Madden
 

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 09:52 AM, Steve and Barb Hile wrote:

Didn’t the initial Tichy molding have the brake wheel on the wrong side of the end sill?

No, that was Walthers.

Tom Madden

 


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Steve and Barb Hile
 

Didn’t the initial Tichy molding have the brake wheel on the wrong side of the end sill?

 

Steve Hile

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Brian Carlson via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 9:51 AM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Tichy GSC Flatcar

 

This is one of those weird times when the Walthers car captures the look of the GSC prototype better. The tichy car molding is too sharp for a casting imho. I was going to do a Pennsy car at one time, but something stopped me.  I don’t recall what that was currently.  

 

Removing the tichy weight works as Eric noted. 

Brian J. Carlson 



On Oct 15, 2020, at 10:32 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

I’ve had a number of projects “go bad” because I assumed the coupler height would be correct but discovered it to be wrong after too many details had been finished to do a major re-work on the underframe. If possible, I try to locate a drawing giving me dimensions to check earlty in the process.

 

Here is a part of a GSC flat car drawing from the SRHA archives… (measurements are always from top of rail). I have not checked the Tichy (PRR?) version against drawings but the Walthers car issued a number of years ago is nearly perfect.

 

Ike

 

<GSC flat end measurements.jpg>


Re: Wabash 7000-7299

James Brewer
 

Ron,

I don't have a photo of these cars; however, I can tell you they were absorbed into the N&W as part of the 1964 merger with Wabash, Nickel Plate, etc.  They were designated N&W Class B69 and renumbered by adding 30 in front of the Wabash number. I've attached scans of the diagram N&W diagram sheets I have for this car.  N&W further renumbered and reclassified these cars but I have no idea why.

Note under the Car Body Data there are two Z stringers on each side; I'm not familiar with the model you have but maybe this was something you wanted to check on.

Also, there are several drawings, but no photos, of these cars in the NWHS archives which can be viewed here:

https://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/listdocs/select.php?index=rs&id=542

Hope this helps.

Jim Brewer


Re: Test

Scott
 

Find the magnitude of the following vector.

 
 
 
 
 

10

 
 
 

11.5

 
 
 

12

 
 
 

9


Wabash 7000-7299

mopacfirst
 

Can anyone shed more light on the boxcar series WAB 7000-7299?  I have two Branchline decorated cars that I stopped working on, partway through.  My recollection is that I discovered something major that was different between the model and the prototype that I chose not to try to change, but I don't remember what it was.

I've confirmed in ORERs from the late 50s that this car series existed, and they were 40' XM with a 6' door, and that substantially all of the cars were in service (quantity in the high 290s).  The model has R/3-4 interim Dreadnaught rolling pin ends.  

What I have not found is any pictures on line.  I have a Wabash (WAB-NKP if I recall) color guide but it's not here.  Any comments?

Ron Merrick


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Brian Carlson
 

This is one of those weird times when the Walthers car captures the look of the GSC prototype better. The tichy car molding is too sharp for a casting imho. I was going to do a Pennsy car at one time, but something stopped me.  I don’t recall what that was currently.  

Removing the tichy weight works as Eric noted. 

Brian J. Carlson 

On Oct 15, 2020, at 10:32 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

I’ve had a number of projects “go bad” because I assumed the coupler height would be correct but discovered it to be wrong after too many details had been finished to do a major re-work on the underframe. If possible, I try to locate a drawing giving me dimensions to check earlty in the process.

Here is a part of a GSC flat car drawing from the SRHA archives… (measurements are always from top of rail). I have not checked the Tichy (PRR?) version against drawings but the Walthers car issued a number of years ago is nearly perfect.

Ike

<GSC flat end measurements.jpg>


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

George Eichelberger
 

I’ve had a number of projects “go bad” because I assumed the coupler height would be correct but discovered it to be wrong after too many details had been finished to do a major re-work on the underframe. If possible, I try to locate a drawing giving me dimensions to check earlty in the process.

Here is a part of a GSC flat car drawing from the SRHA archives… (measurements are always from top of rail). I have not checked the Tichy (PRR?) version against drawings but the Walthers car issued a number of years ago is nearly perfect.

Ike


Test

Paul Doggett
 

Test


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

WILLIAM PARDIE
 

Are we talking about the same GSC Union Pacific flat car thar Exactarail produced an excellent model of?  What is the designation (F-??-?) of the car in question?

Bill Pardie.





Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: Kenneth Montero <va661midlo@...>
Date: 10/14/20 5:00 PM (GMT-10:00)
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Tichy GSC Flatcar

I replaced the Tichy trucks with sprung Bowser trucks, and it raised the coupler height. I don't know what would have happened if I used the Tichy trucks that came with the kit.

I ended up using Kadee couplers with an overset shank to lower the coupler head to the appropriate height above the tracks.

Ken Montero
On 10/14/2020 3:00 PM StephenK <thekays100@...> wrote:


I picked up one of these kits back in the days when you could go to a train show.    After a bit of study, I decided to use it to model a worn UP flat ( http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/up/up59588k.jpg).   I put grooves in the deck (which is pretty poor as it comes) painted decaled and assembled.    Turns out the car is riding very high--the whole body is about 9" high.  Has anybody had this problem?    The kit is very simple--it doesn't seem possible to screw it up (there aren't even any brake parts included, just the one-piece body, a weight and an underframe).

Steve Kay


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Kenneth Montero
 

I replaced the Tichy trucks with sprung Bowser trucks, and it raised the coupler height. I don't know what would have happened if I used the Tichy trucks that came with the kit.

I ended up using Kadee couplers with an overset shank to lower the coupler head to the appropriate height above the tracks.

Ken Montero

On 10/14/2020 3:00 PM StephenK <thekays100@...> wrote:


I picked up one of these kits back in the days when you could go to a train show.    After a bit of study, I decided to use it to model a worn UP flat ( http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/up/up59588k.jpg).   I put grooves in the deck (which is pretty poor as it comes) painted decaled and assembled.    Turns out the car is riding very high--the whole body is about 9" high.  Has anybody had this problem?    The kit is very simple--it doesn't seem possible to screw it up (there aren't even any brake parts included, just the one-piece body, a weight and an underframe).

Steve Kay


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Eric Hansmann
 

I built a couple of these shortly after they were released. I found the same issue. The problem is the car weight thickness. Don’t use it. Install the underframe without that weight then fill space with your favorite weighing material for smaller spaces.

 

Hopefully the weight isn’t glued in place with super-strong adhesive.

 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of StephenK
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 2:00 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Tichy GSC Flatcar

 

I picked up one of these kits back in the days when you could go to a train show.    After a bit of study, I decided to use it to model a worn UP flat (http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/up/up59588k.jpg).   I put grooves in the deck (which is pretty poor as it comes) painted decaled and assembled.    Turns out the car is riding very high--the whole body is about 9" high.  Has anybody had this problem?    The kit is very simple--it doesn't seem possible to screw it up (there aren't even any brake parts included, just the one-piece body, a weight and an underframe).

Steve Kay


Re: Tichy GSC Flatcar

Benjamin Hom
 

Steve Kay wrote:
"I picked up one of these kits back in the days when you could go to a train show.    After a bit of study, I decided to use it to model a worn UP flat (http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/up/up59588k.jpg).   I put grooves in the deck (which is pretty poor as it comes) painted decaled and assembled.    Turns out the car is riding very high--the whole body is about 9" high.  Has anybody had this problem?    The kit is very simple--it doesn't seem possible to screw it up (there aren't even any brake parts included, just the one-piece body, a weight and an underframe)."

While the model (photo from the Tichy website) does appear to ride a bit high compared to the prototype photo, likely as a concession to sharper model railroad curves, 9 inches sounds excessive.

Double check your trucks - not all model trucks conform to the NMRA RP, so if you get a pair on the high side, it'll directly affect the car height.


Ben Hom 


Re: Sunshine Models Kit #21.25

Chuck Cover
 

Thanks Eric.  I appreciate your response.

 

Chuck Cover

Santa Fe, NM

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eric Hansmann
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 10:21 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Sunshine Models Kit #21.25

 

Did you check the Ed Hawkins spreadsheet on thee 1932 ARA cars/

http://steamerafreightcars.com/prototype/frtcars/1932aramain.html

 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Chuck Cover
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 3:10 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Sunshine Models Kit #21.25

 

Hi Everyone,

I have a Sunshine Models Kit #21.25 that is labeled C&O 7000 series 1932 ARA boxcar with radial roof.  The  Prototype Date Sheet #21A for the standard ARA 1932 boxcar states that the C&O had 650 of these cars all with a radial roof.  However, the Sunshine Models all time list indicates that Kit #21.25 is an ARA 1932 C&O 7000 series with Hutchins roof.  The kit components come with peaked 4/4 dreadnaught ends and what appears to be a two piece radial roof, photo attached.  Does anyone else have this kit?  Did Sunshine make some kits with a radial roof and change the label while retaining the number of the Hutchins roof kit in the all time list?   There were only 3 standard C&O ARA 1932 cars but 650 with radial roof so I am hoping that this kit is correctly labeled and I have the prototypical radial roof model.  Thanks

Chuck Cover
Santa Fe, NM

16521 - 16540 of 194661