Date   

Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] PRR X29B and X29D

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

You are welcome, Mike!

 

Elden Gatwood

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Clements via groups.io
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 6:23 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] PRR X29B and X29D

 

Thanks everyone. Got everything I need (including an undec Branchline box with 7 doors, Tom Haag's PK decals and a full bottle of Polly Scale Italian Camo Brown). Since Intermountain no longer sells spare parts, I'll have to rebuild the underframe from the Branchline part, so I'll pass on the offer for more info on that build, but thanks anyway, that would have been the way to go.

Mike Clements
Wakefield, MA
nyc65.wordpress.com


Re: "Tyranical" USRA in 1918

George Eichelberger
 

Eric:

I just scanned a memo that mentioned the DL&W was refusing 5,000 (!) USRA freight cars.

This may explain why I see “errors” in USRA car quantities. Some may be “allocated”, other never purchased because they were not wanted. In a third case, cars were swapped before delivery. SR was allocated USRA single sheathed box cars and managed to get them changed to double sheathed cars

The SR controlled the M&O in 1918, USRA allocated a large number of hoppers to them and expected the Southern to finance them. The M&O was always poverty stricken* and Southern had determined that the M&O could simply not afford to acquire them. Apparently, the SR, USRA and the “Federal Manager” for the Southern could not find documentation ordering them in the first place.

Ike

*Southern serviced M&O locos at Birmingham. Even at some minimal cost, the M&O could not pay Southern for water put in their tenders.

PS You need to make a plan to go down to the SRHA archives this summer!


Re: "Tyranical" USRA in 1918

Eric Hansmann
 

Thanks for sharing that correspondence, Ike. I suspect there were similar letters from other lines. I know the Nickel Plate refused their USRA double-sheathed boxcar assignments and the Lehigh Valley refused their USRA hoppers.

 

A key USRA freight car article was published by James E. Lane in the Spring 1973 Railway and Locomotive Historical Society’s “Railroad History, No. 128”. The article features tables of the original equipment allotments, based upon what USRA officials felt the individual lines needed for their routes. There are also tables of the final equipment assignments. I created a resource page with the USRA assignment data on my blog.

http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/usra-freight-car-assignments/

 

I mentioned earlier that the Nickel Plate refused their cars, yet they are on the assignment list. The cars were in service for a couple of years with Nickel Plate lettering until the Wabash picked them up in 1922. Several notes appear on my data tables to indicate ownership change in the years after USRA control was relinquished.

 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of George Eichelberger
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 8:06 PM
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io; RealSTMFC@groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] "Tyranical" USRA in 1918

 

While scanning multiple WWI era files in the SRHA archives, I’ve learned about an aspect of the United States Railroad Administration (USRA) I was not aware of. In addition to the typical railroad officers, the Southern had a “Federal Manager” that acted as an intermediary between the railroad management and the USRA. The correspondence shows decisions about which USRA “allocations” had been requested, to accept them and then how to pay for them were made by some combination of the three.

 

One answered a long-standing question of mine about why the Southern had so few USRA design box cars. In a full page letter to the USRA, Southern explained that its standard 30-ton, 36ft box cars were more suitable to its freight traffic than the 40ft, 40-T USRA standard cars (designed by the NYC?) that had been allocated. Costs, parts made far from Southern territory and other items were mentioned in the reasons to reject the allocation (apparently not requested by the railroad).

 

Of the multiple examples where cars were allocated but not accepted/wanted by the Southern, the letter sent to Southern President Fairfax Harrison (attached) Nov 14, 1918 resulted in the memo sent by “FH” the next day. Southern managements always resented any attempt at “Government Control” but forcing the railroad to spend money they did not think justifiable was too much.

 

Ike

 

 


Re: "Tyranical" USRA in 1918

Kenneth Montero
 

Wasn't USRA's John Skelton Williams a major figure in the competitor Seaboard Air Line Railroad? If so, that would have added fuel to the fire.
 
Ken Montero

On 04/12/2021 9:05 PM George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:
 
 
While scanning multiple WWI era files in the SRHA archives, I’ve learned about an aspect of the United States Railroad Administration (USRA) I was not aware of. In addition to the typical railroad officers, the Southern had a “Federal Manager” that acted as an intermediary between the railroad management and the USRA. The correspondence shows decisions about which USRA “allocations” had been requested, to accept them and then how to pay for them were made by some combination of the three.
 
One answered a long-standing question of mine about why the Southern had so few USRA design box cars. In a full page letter to the USRA, Southern explained that its standard 30-ton, 36ft box cars were more suitable to its freight traffic than the 40ft, 40-T USRA standard cars (designed by the NYC?) that had been allocated. Costs, parts made far from Southern territory and other items were mentioned in the reasons to reject the allocation (apparently not requested by the railroad).
 
Of the multiple examples where cars were allocated but not accepted/wanted by the Southern, the letter sent to Southern President Fairfax Harrison (attached) Nov 14, 1918 resulted in the memo sent by “FH” the next day. Southern managements always resented any attempt at “Government Control” but forcing the railroad to spend money they did not think justifiable was too much.
 
Ike
 
 


"Tyranical" USRA in 1918

George Eichelberger
 

While scanning multiple WWI era files in the SRHA archives, I’ve learned about an aspect of the United States Railroad Administration (USRA) I was not aware of. In addition to the typical railroad officers, the Southern had a “Federal Manager” that acted as an intermediary between the railroad management and the USRA. The correspondence shows decisions about which USRA “allocations” had been requested, to accept them and then how to pay for them were made by some combination of the three.

One answered a long-standing question of mine about why the Southern had so few USRA design box cars. In a full page letter to the USRA, Southern explained that its standard 30-ton, 36ft box cars were more suitable to its freight traffic than the 40ft, 40-T USRA standard cars (designed by the NYC?) that had been allocated. Costs, parts made far from Southern territory and other items were mentioned in the reasons to reject the allocation (apparently not requested by the railroad).

Of the multiple examples where cars were allocated but not accepted/wanted by the Southern, the letter sent to Southern President Fairfax Harrison (attached) Nov 14, 1918 resulted in the memo sent by “FH” the next day. Southern managements always resented any attempt at “Government Control” but forcing the railroad to spend money they did not think justifiable was too much.

Ike



Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose

Scott H. Haycock
 

Schuyler,
 
Google 'D&RGW short caboose' and there is a picture gallery. Mostly models but some prototype photos. It looks like F&C makes a resin kit of this model; they may have decals.

Scott Haycock
Modeling Tarheel country in the Land of Enchantm
ent

On 04/12/2021 12:18 PM Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:
 
 

I am going to be painting the attached caboose model for a friend.  I have three questions:

 

  1. Can anyone identify this model?  Original date of manufacture?  Importer? Maker?  The box shown with the caboose is evidently the original box, based on the “packing” being the same or very similar to the packing I’ve seen in Max Gray models I’ve bought in original packaging.  There are no markings on the model or on or in the box, other than the pencil notation on the end of the cover.  It’s a very nice model, very well built and seems to be accurate.

  2. The owner of the model has requested I paint it using P-B-L “Rio Grande Freight Car Color.”  If I am not mistaken, that is an acrylic paint, and I am very much disinclined to use an acrylic paint (N.B.: don’t bother to try to tell me that they are easy to use, just as good, clearly the right color or any of that.  Maybe they are in the right hands, but based on my experiences, my hands are not the right hands.  I stick to lacquers, period.)  So are there recommendations among all the experts on this list for a good color in a lacquer paint?  Preferably Scalecoat?

  3. Decals?

 

TIA

 

Schuyler


Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose (amended)

Bryian Sones
 

Larrabee,

Sorry I overlooked your question about the couplers.

I don't use Kadee at all. I use Sergent couplers on all models but the Kadee hon3 coupler should be #714 

Bryian Sones
Union Pacific Prototype Modeler
Murrieta, CA


On Monday, April 12, 2021, 03:29:27 PM PDT, Bryian Sones via groups.io <bryian.sones@...> wrote:


The caboose side widow configuration is typical of the D&RGW short caboose.

The single window side would have the stove with a bunk next to it. 

The model Mark found on  brasstrains, is correctly modeled 0578  (all spotting features I mentioned seem to match the prototype pics)

The trucks on the model have been replaced. They are Blackstone Caboose trucks.

The dual brake cylinder I believe is an error. It should have a brake cylinder and air reservoir on the other side.   

Bryian Sones
Union Pacific Prototype Modeler
Murrieta, CA


On Monday, April 12, 2021, 02:21:53 PM PDT, Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:


Mark!  Thanks for this find, that is the caboose, EXCEPT that the trucks are different.  The one in the linked images has outside hanger brakes, where as the trucks for the subject model do not.  I suspect that the trucks on the brasstrains.com guide page are replacements.  I can tell you that disassembling the caboose this morning convinced me that it has never been disassembled before.

 

It also appears that the person who painted that caboose removed the brass cast scale coupler pocket in favor of a Kadee box.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mark Rossiter
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 5:06 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] HOn3 D&RGW caboose (amended)

 

There is an entry on the BrassTrains.com website that looks a lot like your model that indicates it was imported by PFM in 1964.  The detail on your model looks to be about that vintage.  Although this site claims the builder was Katsumi, I believe United may have utilized a number of builders to produce models under their name.  PFM was a heavy user of United.

 

https://www.brasstrains.com/BrassGuide/Pdg/Detail/27059/HOn3-Rolling-Stock-Caboose-Pacific-Fast-Mail-Denver-Rio-Grande-Western-CABOOSE

 

Mark Rossiter


Re: PFE Express Reefer in NYC Express Train

bill stanton
 

would express reefers have been intermingled with ordinary reefers in the icing process or kept separate?


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 4:22 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] PFE Express Reefer in NYC Express Train
 
please elaborate further...i'm simply trying to figure out how to handle them operationally on my railroad (modeling colton and LA circa 1947)

A string of express reefers might be taken over to the ice deck, if it happened to be nearby. But single cars, and cars in trains without time to wait for movement to an ice deck, would be iced right at the depot, using an elevating truck body to get ice up to the ice hatches. Photos of all this in the PFE book.

Tony Thompson




Re: PFE Express Reefer in NYC Express Train

Tony Thompson
 

please elaborate further...i'm simply trying to figure out how to handle them operationally on my railroad (modeling colton and LA circa 1947)

A string of express reefers might be taken over to the ice deck, if it happened to be nearby. But single cars, and cars in trains without time to wait for movement to an ice deck, would be iced right at the depot, using an elevating truck body to get ice up to the ice hatches. Photos of all this in the PFE book.

Tony Thompson




Re: PFE Express Reefer in NYC Express Train

bill stanton
 

please elaborate further...i'm simply trying to figure out how to handle them operationally on my railroad (modeling colton and LA circa 1947)


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 11:16 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] PFE Express Reefer in NYC Express Train
 
bill stanton wrote:

were these express reefers iced along with ordinary reefers or were they handled separately?

Yes. By which I mean, it depended. 

Tony Thompson




Re: N&W gon loaded with coal in 1938 Kentucky

James Brewer
 

N&W 95762 would be N&W Class GU, #93600 - 97599; cars built in 1925 at a cost of $1,714.82; cars  in series 95600 - 965599 were built by Pressed Steel Car Co.  See Norfolk and Western Coal Cars, 1881 - 1998, by Andrew Dow, page 93.

Jim Brewer


Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose (amended)

Bryian Sones
 

The caboose side widow configuration is typical of the D&RGW short caboose.

The single window side would have the stove with a bunk next to it. 

The model Mark found on  brasstrains, is correctly modeled 0578  (all spotting features I mentioned seem to match the prototype pics)

The trucks on the model have been replaced. They are Blackstone Caboose trucks.

The dual brake cylinder I believe is an error. It should have a brake cylinder and air reservoir on the other side.   

Bryian Sones
Union Pacific Prototype Modeler
Murrieta, CA


On Monday, April 12, 2021, 02:21:53 PM PDT, Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:


Mark!  Thanks for this find, that is the caboose, EXCEPT that the trucks are different.  The one in the linked images has outside hanger brakes, where as the trucks for the subject model do not.  I suspect that the trucks on the brasstrains.com guide page are replacements.  I can tell you that disassembling the caboose this morning convinced me that it has never been disassembled before.

 

It also appears that the person who painted that caboose removed the brass cast scale coupler pocket in favor of a Kadee box.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mark Rossiter
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 5:06 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] HOn3 D&RGW caboose (amended)

 

There is an entry on the BrassTrains.com website that looks a lot like your model that indicates it was imported by PFM in 1964.  The detail on your model looks to be about that vintage.  Although this site claims the builder was Katsumi, I believe United may have utilized a number of builders to produce models under their name.  PFM was a heavy user of United.

 

https://www.brasstrains.com/BrassGuide/Pdg/Detail/27059/HOn3-Rolling-Stock-Caboose-Pacific-Fast-Mail-Denver-Rio-Grande-Western-CABOOSE

 

Mark Rossiter


Re: PRR X29B and X29D

Mike Clements
 

Thanks everyone. Got everything I need (including an undec Branchline box with 7 doors, Tom Haag's PK decals and a full bottle of Polly Scale Italian Camo Brown). Since Intermountain no longer sells spare parts, I'll have to rebuild the underframe from the Branchline part, so I'll pass on the offer for more info on that build, but thanks anyway, that would have been the way to go.

Mike Clements
Wakefield, MA
nyc65.wordpress.com


Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Thanks, Dan, that caboose appears to have a rounded corner on the carbody itself, which makes it different that the model I have to paint.  I appreciate your sending along this image.

 

Geez, this morning I didn’t know one D&RGW narrow gauge caboose from another and now I’m picking out spotting features.  Is this a great list to learn from, or not!?

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Daniel A. Mitchell
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 6:10 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] HOn3 D&RGW caboose

 

Can’t help with the exact color issue, but we have D&RGW shorty caboose no.0526 here at the Huckleberry Railroad in Flint, MI. Sadly for your question, the cabose has been repainted several times over its lifetime, and was recenty totally restored (frame-up) here at HRR just a few years ago. It’s now about 80% new wood, though we reused what we could if it remained structurally sound.

 

Dan Mitchell

==========

 

 



On Apr 12, 2021, at 3:16 PM, Todd Sullivan via groups.io <sullivant41@...> wrote:

 

Schuyler,

I don't want to tout the obvious, but the PFM label on the caboose (the bottom, I assume) identifies it as a PFM product, and it definitely has the appearance of a D&RGW narrow gauge caboose with 4 wheel trucks.I'm not sufficiently conversant with Rio Grande ng cabooses to be able to suggest a number or series, but there are photos on Google that show several of these short cabooses with numbers in the 0500 series.

Todd Sullivan

 


Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose

Daniel A. Mitchell
 

Can’t help with the exact color issue, but we have D&RGW shorty caboose no.0526 here at the Huckleberry Railroad in Flint, MI. Sadly for your question, the cabose has been repainted several times over its lifetime, and was recenty totally restored (frame-up) here at HRR just a few years ago. It’s now about 80% new wood, though we reused what we could if it remained structurally sound.

Dan Mitchell
==========




On Apr 12, 2021, at 3:16 PM, Todd Sullivan via groups.io <sullivant41@...> wrote:

Schuyler,

I don't want to tout the obvious, but the PFM label on the caboose (the bottom, I assume) identifies it as a PFM product, and it definitely has the appearance of a D&RGW narrow gauge caboose with 4 wheel trucks.I'm not sufficiently conversant with Rio Grande ng cabooses to be able to suggest a number or series, but there are photos on Google that show several of these short cabooses with numbers in the 0500 series.

Todd Sullivan


Image of UP 81682 gon Denver CO 1910s?1920?

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
Image of UP 81682 gon Denver CO 1910s?1920?
 
 
More info at the link below...
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 
 


IC 40ft ds boxcar and a CB&Q composite gon at Franklin Cnty Coal Co Illinois 1939

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
Image of an IC 40ft ds boxcar and a CB&Q composite gon at Franklin Cnty Coal Co Illinois 1939
 
 
More details can be found at the link below...
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 


Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose (amended)

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Mark!  Thanks for this find, that is the caboose, EXCEPT that the trucks are different.  The one in the linked images has outside hanger brakes, where as the trucks for the subject model do not.  I suspect that the trucks on the brasstrains.com guide page are replacements.  I can tell you that disassembling the caboose this morning convinced me that it has never been disassembled before.

 

It also appears that the person who painted that caboose removed the brass cast scale coupler pocket in favor of a Kadee box.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mark Rossiter
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 5:06 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] HOn3 D&RGW caboose (amended)

 

There is an entry on the BrassTrains.com website that looks a lot like your model that indicates it was imported by PFM in 1964.  The detail on your model looks to be about that vintage.  Although this site claims the builder was Katsumi, I believe United may have utilized a number of builders to produce models under their name.  PFM was a heavy user of United.

 

https://www.brasstrains.com/BrassGuide/Pdg/Detail/27059/HOn3-Rolling-Stock-Caboose-Pacific-Fast-Mail-Denver-Rio-Grande-Western-CABOOSE

 

Mark Rossiter


Re: HOn3 D&RGW caboose

Schuyler Larrabee
 

From Brian Sones:

 

1) Car Ends -There is a rounded version and a Square (flush end)           Square ends - carbody

2) The bolster ends. -There is a Square and Rounded end                       None visible on the model

3) Copula windows -  Double window,  cross braces and none                 None

4) Copula window awnings - Double, single or none                                Single

5) Copula  Square or Angled sides                                                         Square

6) steps- straight or angled sides,.                                                         Straight

7) ladders Below roof straight or curved. Above roof curved.                    Below roof, curved at top

 

Incidentally the model has two brake cylinders (and no other underbody detailing, and has brass scale coupler pockets, leading to the question of how to affix a Kadee coupler (which I know the owner will want).

 

And as Gary mentioned, there are two windows on the non-smokebox side (conversely, one window on the smokestack side).

 

So, Brian, does that put this model in a particular number series?  Thank you very much for this list of spotting features.

 

Schuyler

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bryian Sones via groups.io
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 4:38 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io; main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] HOn3 D&RGW caboose

 

Add me to the list of Star Brand being a good paint and not an Acrylic. It is great on brass or plastic.

 

I model U.P. and D&RGW narrow gauge in Ho. 

I am not saying I'm an expert on the D&RGW short caboose at all but...

I did do some research to build a few of them

I built 5 of them from PSC kits and I have two brass ones

 

There are a bunch of variations of the short caboose so you really shouldn't decal it without doing some research if you want it correct.

spotting things to look for are:

 

1) Car Ends -There is a rounded version and a Square (flush end)

2) The bolster ends. -There is a Square and Rounded end

3) Copula windows -  Double window,  cross braces and none

4) Copula window awnings - Double, single or none

5) Copula  Square or Angled sides

6) steps- straight or angled sides,.

7) ladders Below roof straight or curved. Above roof curved.

 

A good reference book is Narrow gauge pictorial volume V . "Cabooses of The D&RGW".

 

Decals,  I use San Juan Decals or Thin Film  

 

 

Bryian Sones

Union Pacific Prototype Modeler

Murrieta, CA

 

 

On Monday, April 12, 2021, 12:26:46 PM PDT, gary laakso <vasa0vasa@...> wrote:

 

 

The PFE 1963 catalogue (8th Edition) shows two windows on the side on the smoke stack side.   The same caboose with the dual windows on the smokestack side is shown in the 7th Edition catalogue.  The 9th edition catalogue shows two windows on the non-smoke stack side.

 

Gary Laakso

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Todd Sullivan via groups.io
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 12:17 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] HOn3 D&RGW caboose

 

Schuyler,

I don't want to tout the obvious, but the PFM label on the caboose (the bottom, I assume) identifies it as a PFM product, and it definitely has the appearance of a D&RGW narrow gauge caboose with 4 wheel trucks.I'm not sufficiently conversant with Rio Grande ng cabooses to be able to suggest a number or series, but there are photos on Google that show several of these short cabooses with numbers in the 0500 series.

Todd Sullivan


composite gons in 1949 at Commonwealth Edison Chicago area

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
A nice trio of composite gons in 1949 at a Commonwealth Edison Chicago area coal fired power plant. I am not an expert, but they look like other IC composite gons I have seen.
 
I like the coal storage pile in the background.
 
Also, what is the piece of rolling stock up against the bumping post and coupled to the boxcar?
 
 
More info here, including inscription on back of image...
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 

3821 - 3840 of 187181