Date   

Re: Model identification

Tim O'Connor
 


Lambert, absolutely. The Tangent model is more accurate and better detailed, but overall they represent
the same car. See the Car Builder Cyc 1961, page 303 - photo of GATX 64641

Tim O'Connor


On 5/4/2021 11:24 PM, nyc3001 . wrote:
I think it was made by Lambert. The 8k prototype is the same as the Tangent model. They also made an ICC-103 welded tank that was 10k gallons.

-Phil

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

Dennis Storzek
 

On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 11:34 AM, Ian Cranstone wrote:
and they also had the interesting practice of extensive rebuilds of cars (1890s era), in which a boxcar would be rebuilt – which pretty much seems to consist of jacking up the number and inserting a completely new car (28’ or 29’ foot cars would emerge as a 34’ or later a 36’ car)
The Soo engaged in this practice also, again very evident in the caboose fleet. Dimensions inexplicably change for just one car in a series, and the records just claim "rebuilt." I've made my peace with not arguing with the primary source; if they say it was rebuilt, it was rebuilt. But I'm thoroughly convinced that the rebuilding process consisted of stripping the trucks, ironwork, and stove from the wrecked car and applying them to a brand new body, built to the then current standard.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

akerboomk
 

There is a roofwalk support just next to where the lateral(?) roofwalk attaches.

If you zoom in, it seems to me that the hinges are set up so the hatches open lengthwise (toward the end of the car) rather than crosswise (toward the side)

Which then begs the question – what are all those supports outboard of the hatches????

 

Stabbing in dark… You take the whole running board from the center of the car, place it on the supports outboard the hatches, then you can open the hatches?


--
Ken Akerboom


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

Ian Cranstone
 

The Grand Trunk Railway of Canada engaged in this practice as well, and continued it as late as 1915 based upon available documentation. I’ve had the opportunity to consult a car ledger held by Library and Archives Canada, and they also had the interesting practice of extensive rebuilds of cars (1890s era), in which a boxcar would be rebuilt – which pretty much seems to consist of jacking up the number and inserting a completely new car (28’ or 29’ foot cars would emerge as a 34’ or later a 36’ car). Until I became aware of this practice, I was baffled as to how they managed to keep number series fully occupied for years.

Ian Cranstone

Osgoode, Ontario, Canada

lamontc@...

http://freightcars.nakina.net


On May 5, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...> wrote:

On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 06:00 AM, gary laakso wrote:
The use of equipment trusts to finance rolling stock and locomotives followed the Transportation Act of 1920 and the re-financing of existing mortgages to carve out rolling stock and locomotives from the mortgages.
Thank you for this. It answers a question I've long had.

In the early years of the twentieth century, and perhaps before, it was relatively common for railroads to buy new equipment and number it in existing number series to "fill in" vacancies left by equipment  destroyed by wrecks. The Soo Line did this a lot with cabooses; buy twenty new cabooses but only number 14 in a straight series, assigning random numbers to the other six. It really made the caboose roster hard to understand in the days when primary source roster material was not readily available, since these randomly numbered cars bore no resemblance to the rest of the series. Now that there is better documentation available, I can see that the practice also extended to the freightcar fleet in general, but it was more noticeable with cabooses, since there were more photos available, allowing one to see the discontinuity of the fleet.

I had always suspected the purpose was to keep the value of the installed equipment constant, i.e. I started the year with 100 cabooses, and at year end I still have 100 cabooses, plus betterments, and I always wondered if there was an incentive to do this in being able to expense the replacements immediately rather than having to capitalize and depreciate them over time. I also wondered what ended the practice, and It appears this act which separated equipment trusts from the overall value of the property is the reason.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

gary laakso
 

Plus, the no tie plates to hold the rail. 

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 11:05 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

 

There IS something strange about that roof . . . the roof walk has many humps in it and appears to rest on the hatch covers.  ??                                                         

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Charlie Vlk
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 1:47 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

 

All-

It almost looks like the running boards were improperly installed….it looks like there are supports for off-center boards and the hatches are hinged to open along the length of the car.  It doesn’t look like the boards have any attachment from the laterals inboard.

Also note the use of arch bar trucks in a car built in 1935!!!

Charlie Vlk

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 10:51 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

 

Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Photos from the Pullman Library:

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-gsBLCHC/A

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-xrnPPtP/buy

Click on the photos twice for maximum enlargement.

Built 12-40.

Interesting inboard hatch cover arrangement.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

Dennis Storzek
 

On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 06:00 AM, gary laakso wrote:
The use of equipment trusts to finance rolling stock and locomotives followed the Transportation Act of 1920 and the re-financing of existing mortgages to carve out rolling stock and locomotives from the mortgages.
Thank you for this. It answers a question I've long had.

In the early years of the twentieth century, and perhaps before, it was relatively common for railroads to buy new equipment and number it in existing number series to "fill in" vacancies left by equipment  destroyed by wrecks. The Soo Line did this a lot with cabooses; buy twenty new cabooses but only number 14 in a straight series, assigning random numbers to the other six. It really made the caboose roster hard to understand in the days when primary source roster material was not readily available, since these randomly numbered cars bore no resemblance to the rest of the series. Now that there is better documentation available, I can see that the practice also extended to the freightcar fleet in general, but it was more noticeable with cabooses, since there were more photos available, allowing one to see the discontinuity of the fleet.

I had always suspected the purpose was to keep the value of the installed equipment constant, i.e. I started the year with 100 cabooses, and at year end I still have 100 cabooses, plus betterments, and I always wondered if there was an incentive to do this in being able to expense the replacements immediately rather than having to capitalize and depreciate them over time. I also wondered what ended the practice, and It appears this act which separated equipment trusts from the overall value of the property is the reason.

Dennis Storzek


Re: Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Schuyler Larrabee
 

There IS something strange about that roof . . . the roof walk has many humps in it and appears to rest on the hatch covers.  ??                                                         

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Charlie Vlk
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 1:47 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

 

All-

It almost looks like the running boards were improperly installed….it looks like there are supports for off-center boards and the hatches are hinged to open along the length of the car.  It doesn’t look like the boards have any attachment from the laterals inboard.

Also note the use of arch bar trucks in a car built in 1935!!!

Charlie Vlk

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 10:51 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

 

Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Photos from the Pullman Library:

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-gsBLCHC/A

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-xrnPPtP/buy

Click on the photos twice for maximum enlargement.

Built 12-40.

Interesting inboard hatch cover arrangement.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Now that you mention it, Charlie, it does look a little “peaked.”

 

It’s the variety of cars in these early photos that makes the era appealing . . .

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Charlie Vlk
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2021 1:52 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

 

C&NW 91226 seems to have a more steeply sloped roof than normal….compare the angle to the two cars it is between…almost the width of the fascia board oon the C&NW box next to it…

Charlie Vlk

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 10:11 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

 

Claus, I think that says Barley MIX, not MEX.  And the wood which appears to be nailed on?  I think the consigners we worried that the door would flex enough to let the load leak out at the bottom sides of the doors, so they improvised a “clamp” to hold it tight.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2021 3:36 PM
To: STMFC <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: [RealSTMFC] C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

 

Hi List Members,

 

C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922, Is there a temporary repair or other expedient on the lower part of the door? Perhaps to deal with a broken door mechanism? Note the chalk mark that might read "Barley Mex" but I could be wrong.

 

We also get partial views of boxcar SP 21580 and a ss C&NW boxcar.

 

 

Enjoy!

 

Claus Schlund


Re: C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

Charlie Vlk
 

C&NW 91226 seems to have a more steeply sloped roof than normal….compare the angle to the two cars it is between…almost the width of the fascia board oon the C&NW box next to it…

Charlie Vlk

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 10:11 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

 

Claus, I think that says Barley MIX, not MEX.  And the wood which appears to be nailed on?  I think the consigners we worried that the door would flex enough to let the load leak out at the bottom sides of the doors, so they improvised a “clamp” to hold it tight.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2021 3:36 PM
To: STMFC <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: [RealSTMFC] C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

 

Hi List Members,

 

C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922, Is there a temporary repair or other expedient on the lower part of the door? Perhaps to deal with a broken door mechanism? Note the chalk mark that might read "Barley Mex" but I could be wrong.

 

We also get partial views of boxcar SP 21580 and a ss C&NW boxcar.

 

 

Enjoy!

 

Claus Schlund


Re: Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Charlie Vlk
 

All-

It almost looks like the running boards were improperly installed….it looks like there are supports for off-center boards and the hatches are hinged to open along the length of the car.  It doesn’t look like the boards have any attachment from the laterals inboard.

Also note the use of arch bar trucks in a car built in 1935!!!

Charlie Vlk

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 10:51 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

 

Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Photos from the Pullman Library:

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-gsBLCHC/A

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-xrnPPtP/buy

Click on the photos twice for maximum enlargement.

Built 12-40.

Interesting inboard hatch cover arrangement.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

Robert J Miller CFA
 

Technically, they were known as Equipment Trusts. As such each trust would have a trustee, who was responsible for receiving and disbursing the interest payments on the bonds. Unlike a mortgage, the borrower typically did not have the right to pay the bonds off early, except in cases where damaged equipment was scrapped.

There were two common types of equipment trusts. Under one type the borrower acquired title to the equipment only after the full term of the bonds, which was normally 20 years, and the principal of the notes was paid in full. Under the second type the borrower acquired partial title after each year’s interest and a partial principal payment were made. Full title came at maturity of the bonds, again the typical term was 20 years. The equipment also had to be insured against loss.

I spent most of my working life managing investments for trusts and individuals. I recall buying an equipment trust bond for an account I managed, which held some locomotives acquired by the Santa Fe. A year or two into the life of the equipment trust one locomotive was wrecked and subsequently scrapped. We received a payment from the trustee of the equipment trust representing the value of the locomotive because the trust no longer owned the stated number of locomotives.

I can’t speak to the OPER’s accuracy, but the trustees of equipment trusts would have had serial numbers, etc. for everything each trust owned. Failure to keep adequate records and do audits could expose the trustee to significant financial liability.


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of gary laakso <vasa0vasa@...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 9:00:47 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers
 

The use of equipment trusts to finance rolling stock and locomotives followed the Transportation Act of 1920 and the re-financing of existing mortgages to carve out rolling stock and locomotives from the mortgages.

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of gary laakso
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 5:40 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

 

The number of freight cars, passenger cars, work equipment and locomotive would have been reviewed by potential buyers of mortgage bonds since they were part of the collateral supporting the bonds along with the physical plant.  The need for cash really helped record keeping and reporting.  Plus, when collateral was destroyed, it had to be replaced and there were periodic reporting requirements for equipment under the mortgages.  I suspect that the mortgage agents visited the railroads to make sure that equipment pledged was in fact there. 

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of akerboomk
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 5:24 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

 

  1. They were only as accurate as the data the railroads supplied
  2. I have noted a couple times where an intermediate line was removed but the following line’s “CLASS” field (using “dittos”) wasn’t fixed for an issue or 2
    (but now I can’t seem to find the specific examples, so the example below is “made up”)

 

e.g.

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

101-200 BOX

201-300 “

--------------------

 

Became

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 “

--------------------

 

And then

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 BOX

--------------------

 

 

  1. Once they claimed there were 110 cars in series 12500-12599

 

But, as Ed said – it is remarkable the accuracy they had

(but then again, how would we know if they are wrong? – in particular the car counts)

 


--
Ken Akerboom


Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Bob Chaparro
 

Photo: Union Carbide Covered Hopper 552

Photos from the Pullman Library:

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-gsBLCHC/A

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-xrnPPtP/buy

Click on the photos twice for maximum enlargement.

Built 12-40.

Interesting inboard hatch cover arrangement.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Photo: Zehners Brothers Packing Company Reefer 201

Bob Chaparro
 

Photo: Zehners Brothers Packing Company Reefer 201

Photo from the Pullman Library:

https://pullman-lib.smugmug.com/Railroad-U-Z/i-SXnwvpd/A

Click on the photo twice for maximum enlargement.

Zehners Brothers were based in Ohio.

Information from the Rutherford B. Hayes Presidential Library & Museums:

“Established in 1884 in Bellevue, Ohio, brothers John and Charles Zehner specialized in selling wholesale smoked and salted meats and lard. They incorporated the business in 1894, and expanded with a second facility in Toledo, Ohio, in 1906. They established a reputation for excellence in processing Dresden ham under the name Bell Vue Brand. After the closing of the Toledo plant in 1922, The Zehners modernized the Bellevue operation. Zehner’s Packing closed in 1971.”

Clover House may have a dry transfer set for this car:

https://cloverhouse.com/Cart/product_info.php?products_id=12126

Bob Chaparro

Moderator

Railway Bull Shippers Group

https://groups.io/g/RailwayBullShippersGroup


Re: C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Claus, I think that says Barley MIX, not MEX.  And the wood which appears to be nailed on?  I think the consigners we worried that the door would flex enough to let the load leak out at the bottom sides of the doors, so they improvised a “clamp” to hold it tight.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2021 3:36 PM
To: STMFC <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: [RealSTMFC] C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922

 

Hi List Members,

 

C&NW 81226 36ft ds trussrod box in Mexico 1922, Is there a temporary repair or other expedient on the lower part of the door? Perhaps to deal with a broken door mechanism? Note the chalk mark that might read "Barley Mex" but I could be wrong.

 

We also get partial views of boxcar SP 21580 and a ss C&NW boxcar.

 

 

Enjoy!

 

Claus Schlund


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

George Eichelberger
 

I have jumped in on this topic before. Our concept of how “accurate” the ORERS misses the point of their intended use and how the railroads maintained the information in them.

They were NOT intended to be a roster of equipment! They were used to describe cars in interchange service. If a car was interchanged, it needed to be included in the ORER data. If a car was listed in the Register but it had already been stricken from the books of the owner IT DID NOT MATTER as that car could not be interchanged. In that case, the quantity of cars in that series would be incorrect. I expect there would be many errors for car series in the process of being scrapped or renumbered. Between the lead time needed to get the data for the next version on the Register, time to print and the time that copy was “current”, scrapping, renumbering or addition of new cars would continue.

Using Southern Railway System data, there are multiple internal memos discussing changes to be made in the next ORER. There are examples where a car series was shown in the ORER that did not exist. In one case, a group of rebuilt 40’ box cars were shown to have 70-T capy, trucks. In anticipation of the cars being placed in service, the ORER listing was modified before publication. Problem was, the cars were rebuilt with 50-T trucks so they could not be used in interchange service with those ORER road numbers.

Again, a Sou Rwy example, when a series of cars was due to be retired, the "quantity of cars” did not need to be maintained exactly. Cars would simply “disappear” from interchange service. Maintaining a “count down” of car quantities in the ORER served no business purpose.

So new cars could be used as soon as they were delivered, the entire series would be listed beforehand. Like scrapped cars, if that road number did not yet exist, there was no way the car could be interchanged so the “error” would be meaningless.

I agree ORERS are important documents but, while railfans may want to know how many cars are in series “X”, that was not the reference used to update ICC records or a railroad’s mechanical data or rosters.

Ike


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

Larry Goolsby
 

One more point, especially regarding the SFRD question, is that the listings tended to reflect how cars were actually marked and not how the owning RR or company may have changed its name. Thus after mergers, cars still rolling with pre-merger names and reporting marks continued to be listed as such within the new company's entry. Not sure if this explains the SFRD situation though. 

Larry Goolsby 


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

gary laakso
 

The use of equipment trusts to finance rolling stock and locomotives followed the Transportation Act of 1920 and the re-financing of existing mortgages to carve out rolling stock and locomotives from the mortgages.

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of gary laakso
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 5:40 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

 

The number of freight cars, passenger cars, work equipment and locomotive would have been reviewed by potential buyers of mortgage bonds since they were part of the collateral supporting the bonds along with the physical plant.  The need for cash really helped record keeping and reporting.  Plus, when collateral was destroyed, it had to be replaced and there were periodic reporting requirements for equipment under the mortgages.  I suspect that the mortgage agents visited the railroads to make sure that equipment pledged was in fact there. 

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of akerboomk
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 5:24 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

 

  1. They were only as accurate as the data the railroads supplied
  2. I have noted a couple times where an intermediate line was removed but the following line’s “CLASS” field (using “dittos”) wasn’t fixed for an issue or 2
    (but now I can’t seem to find the specific examples, so the example below is “made up”)

 

e.g.

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

101-200 BOX

201-300 “

--------------------

 

Became

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 “

--------------------

 

And then

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 BOX

--------------------

 

 

  1. Once they claimed there were 110 cars in series 12500-12599

 

But, as Ed said – it is remarkable the accuracy they had

(but then again, how would we know if they are wrong? – in particular the car counts)

 


--
Ken Akerboom


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

gary laakso
 

The number of freight cars, passenger cars, work equipment and locomotive would have been reviewed by potential buyers of mortgage bonds since they were part of the collateral supporting the bonds along with the physical plant.  The need for cash really helped record keeping and reporting.  Plus, when collateral was destroyed, it had to be replaced and there were periodic reporting requirements for equipment under the mortgages.  I suspect that the mortgage agents visited the railroads to make sure that equipment pledged was in fact there. 

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of akerboomk
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 5:24 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

 

  1. They were only as accurate as the data the railroads supplied
  2. I have noted a couple times where an intermediate line was removed but the following line’s “CLASS” field (using “dittos”) wasn’t fixed for an issue or 2
    (but now I can’t seem to find the specific examples, so the example below is “made up”)

 

e.g.

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

101-200 BOX

201-300 “

--------------------

 

Became

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 “

--------------------

 

And then

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 BOX

--------------------

 

 

  1. Once they claimed there were 110 cars in series 12500-12599

 

But, as Ed said – it is remarkable the accuracy they had

(but then again, how would we know if they are wrong? – in particular the car counts)

 


--
Ken Akerboom


Re: Accuracy Of The Official Railway Equipment Registers

akerboomk
 

1)    They were only as accurate as the data the railroads supplied

2)    I have noted a couple times where an intermediate line was removed but the following line’s “CLASS” field (using “dittos”) wasn’t fixed for an issue or 2
(but now I can’t seem to find the specific examples, so the example below is “made up”)

 

e.g.

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

101-200 BOX

201-300 “

--------------------

 

Became

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 “

--------------------

 

And then

-------------------

1-100     BOX, SPECIAL

201-300 BOX

--------------------

 

 

3)    Once they claimed there were 110 cars in series 12500-12599

 

But, as Ed said – it is remarkable the accuracy they had

(but then again, how would we know if they are wrong? – in particular the car counts)

 


--
Ken Akerboom


SL-SF Tank Car, Possible Red Caboose Prototype

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

Friends,

This SL-SF tank car used to sit in Denver just short of the Union Station. I think it was being used as a stationary fuel tank, or perhaps for waste oil, as I saw it many times from the California Zephyr in the 1990s. 

As I was cleaning up this really bad image (shot through an Amtrak coach window), I realized that this is remarkably similar to the old Red Caboose/Intermountain welded tank car. There aren't many verified matches for this model, U.S. Army/DODX, UTLX and a few AC&F leasers with tank platforms.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff  🦆

3141 - 3160 of 187178