Date   

Re: caboose colors

Ray Hutchison
 

Josh, Evan shared this document on this (or another list) a short time ago.  The reference re: GN caboose indirect; the full article is copied here:

The Wenatchee Valley & Northern Ry. Co. has received its new caboose fresh from the makers, the Seattle Mfg.
Co., and it has been put in commission. It has already been appreciated by many passengers, ranchers, fishermen
and others who have occasion to go up the Chumstick valley for the seventeen miles the road is completed. The caboose
is painted red, but of a darker hue than the Great Northern cars. This, in combination with a slight change in its number,
"01," 
might, on a dark night, cause some individual to imagine he saw a gigantic roulette wheel. Some of the train
crew are mourning because the interior was not painted a nice soft green, as was originally intended. Instead, it
has been painted a bright yellow and it is feared it will be hard work to keep the green signal lamps from going out. 

At the beginning of the compendium is the following statement:

Throughout this document, dozens of sources report on the use of “red,”  “metallic” and “mineral” paints. For the most part, these words are interchangeable, referring to paints manufactured from iron oxides. In general, unless a specific shade such as “crimson,” “Tuscan” (Rio Grande Western passenger cars),  “vermillion” (Red Line Fast Freight) or “brilliant” (Denver & Rio Grande cabooses) is specified, “red,” in the context of railroad pigments, often referred to what we may call brown or a brown-red.

So the actual reference(in article in Leavenworth Times from 1906) doesn't give us much to go on: were the GN caboose a light red/vermilion color, and the Wannatche Valley caboose a mineral red or boxcar red?  Was the GN caboose scarlet red and the Wannatche Valley caboose boxcar red?

Inquiring minds still want to know...


Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: PRR Merchandise Service Boxcar 37007

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Scott;

 

From the limited correspondence I read, the intention was to have the cars go between certain origination through many destinations, on an expedited delivery basis, subject to adjustment as needed.

 

The cars assigned show, to me, some confusion.

 

The expansion beyond X40B is notable, but still confusing.

 

The earliest scheme was sure pretty.  Example attached in color.

 

The concept did not pan out.  Many cars ended up in general service, far offline, later, and many not repainted became very ugly.  Example attached.

 

Some stayed in LCL to near the end.  Numbers in various ORERs.

 

Elden Gatwood

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Scott
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 1:56 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: PRR Merchandise Service Boxcar 37007

 

That's an interesting car for sure.  With Pierre's oil canning effect that would make a neat HO scale car.   Did those cars make it off line at all or where they in dedicated service on specific routes?

Scott McDonald 


Re: HO Freight Car Truck Axle Lengths

Jay Styron
 

Glen,
Bowser axles are a bit longer than most others. I keep some of their wheelsets around for situations where others have too much play.
-Jay Styron


Re: HO Freight Car Truck Axle Lengths

Mark Rossiter
 

Glen, about the time REBOXX faded from the model railroad supply chain, I decided to quit using a lot of the various factory supplied trucks, unless they were really specific to that car (such as the PRR trucks on Bowser cars)  This included a lot of the sprung trucks I originally wanted to change over to code 88 tread widths.  With the help of the members on this forum, I was converted to the idea that the sprung sideframe feature was not all that helpful and in fact became a real annoyance when one or more of the springs went missing somehow. 

 

I now standardize on Accurail and Tahoe Model Works trucks for nearly everything, with the few appropriate trucks that aren’t available from those manufacturers being supplied by Bowser, Kadee HGV and a few select others.  Having said that, I tend to leave the trucks on Rapido, Tangent and some Exact Rail models alone as they are generally of very high quality and readily accept semi-scale wheelsets from Intermountain and Tangent Scale models.  While many Atlas trucks are highly detailed, they are the most problematic in obtaining semi-scale wheelsets for as the factory supplied axles are considerably shorter than anyone else’s on the market.  As a result, many of them get replaced with one of the other manufacturer’s trucks mentioned previously.  The same is true of Kato trucks. 

 

Mark Rossiter         

 


Re: Still another eBay listing

Clark Propst
 

The reweigh is 11-48, easily changed. Would be happy to do that for the buyer.

The interior is 'cleaner' now after use.

The back story for this car is I have a magazine with an article on the branch I model by Bill Armstrong. There's a photo (attached) of them turning the engine on a wye. The train has an 40' NYC gondola. One day talking to a friend he said he was about to start on a NYC gondola. After asking about the model I said I'd like to buy it. Fast forward 18 months, we're at Caboose Stop Hobbies in Cedar Falls Iowa. There's a couple partially built older kits that have been there for years. I asked what the "Make me buy it" price was? They ended up coming home with me. One was a NYC 40' gon. I don't need two and thought the Sunshine model might be more in demand than the older one. So, I put it on eBay.

Clark Propst


Re: caboose colors

Jerry Michels
 

Josh thanks for sharing this amazing document!  It should answer a lot of questions.  Jerry Michels


Re: caboose colors

Josh
 

Denver & Rio Grande painted their cabooses "brilliant red" starting in the 1870s. It was not until 1916 that they switched to a freight car brown. Basically, red cabooses have existed almost as long as cabooses have.

I recommend browsing this document (yeah, it's over four hundred pages long, but well worth it): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jbXGfg9V3cY0awKamkrwM2JlLSQepapDwU9A3Dx43-M/edit

Under Great Northern it mentions that Great Northern cabooses were red at least as early as 1910.

Josh Bernhard


Re: Retired vs. Scrapped?

akerboomk
 

I probably should have said…

They also specifically note cars converted to work service (“Converted to W3000” or “Mxxxx” or “Sxxxx” or “0xxx”)

 

Also some cars were “sold for scrap” [or retired] then 2 (or 3 or 4) months later they were “returned to service and converted to [work equipment number]”

 

So the “sold for scrap” did not necessarily mean they were immediately scrapped.

 

Thanks all for your thoughts!

 

 

 


--
Ken Akerboom


Re: HO Freight Car Truck Axle Lengths

Brian Carlson
 

Glen. 
Intermountain wheels are around 1.015 axle length. Tangent and arrowhead are about the same. Exxactrail code 88 are 1.002 but I’ve not used them. 

Some might work in those trucks you have. Alternatively you can upgrade the trucks to those by Tahoe model works, tangent, rapido and others where appropriate. 

Brian J. Carlson 

On Jul 5, 2021, at 10:14 PM, Vera Mills <gleng20.mills@...> wrote:

Hello,
Having exhausted my HO freight car trucks with metal wheels, I now have a need to purchase replacement wheel sets.
Trucks in my spares box requiring metal axles and wheels are as follows:
Accurail 100
Athearn 90400
C&BT Shops equivalent to Walthers 1001/1012
Intermountain pre-war A3
Roundhouse 2923
Train-Miniature/Walthers 1001/1012.
I realise that the situation is more difficult with the demise of Reboxx but any suggestions of a source for both code 88 and 110 wheels would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Regards,
Glen Mills


HO Freight Car Truck Axle Lengths

Vera Mills
 

Hello,
Having exhausted my HO freight car trucks with metal wheels, I now have a need to purchase replacement wheel sets.
Trucks in my spares box requiring metal axles and wheels are as follows:
Accurail 100
Athearn 90400
C&BT Shops equivalent to Walthers 1001/1012
Intermountain pre-war A3
Roundhouse 2923
Train-Miniature/Walthers 1001/1012.
I realise that the situation is more difficult with the demise of Reboxx but any suggestions of a source for both code 88 and 110 wheels would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Regards,
Glen Mills


Re: [EXT] [RealSTMFC] caboose colors

Ed
 

...and then there was the red-white-blue schemes of 1976, like the Lehigh Valley.

Ed Robinson


Re: Friction Bearings – How Old Is This Term?

np328
 

I cannot help but wonder...
     We here have the wonderful ability to use hindsight. I recall a professor in college stating that it takes 30 years for things to settle and calm down before we can come to a consensus on historical events. Since this STMFC timeline stops effectively at 1960, well, we are there with some time to spare. 

However first, a set of guideposts need to be put in place.
       And those guideposts are as I have stated to my historical society from time to time: Never forget - that a railroad is first and foremost a business established and indeed, required by law to (1) make a profit and (2) protect at all times, the shareholders financial interests.      

So with that in mind, and about the adoption of roller bearings. How soon would a payoff be seen?  
         I am not arguing that an eventual payoff would not be there. What I am hoping to establish is - the reports of roller bearing relief, I'll call it. Are there many other than the PRR report in historical engineering files of the railroads. I will admit I have never looked specifically. I know the NP was pleased with the Timken locomotive and that it did influence locomotive designing. (And yes, I know why the NP bought it.) 

         I had the fortune to research at times over the years with a civil engineer (Jerry) formerly employed by the NP, GN, and BN, and while researching posed him questions like this one. Track realignment projects, grade reduction projects, tunneling projects, and other matters. 

(Typical 1980-2010 research conversation and I have uncovered some file tangential to the days research. ) 
Me: Hey Jerry, this looks like a great idea! Why was it never done? 
Jerry: Oh that project. Yeah it was a OK idea.  Why wasn't it done? Because it would not have given a return on the monies spent within four years. 
Me: It would have paid dividends back for the last fifty years now and forever after.      So four years ROI, that's what a project needs to be OK'd? 
Jerry: Well, that was back then in the 50s and 60s. It's tighter now. 

    And so,  would you like to be the person that submits an AFE that states:

      This will cost a good sum of money, of which much of it may need to be borrowed, and we will need to cover the interest on that. It will require that much of the current stock in our storehouses be rendered obsolete before its time and so we will lose that benefit. Besides that, not all sideframe or truck castings on the currently running freight cars are adoptable so we will need to handle that additional aspect with our shop forces. Payback or ROI of this project to be realized will take some time to be before it starts to accrue.  And as we expand this program, the return on investment will start to diminish well before the program is complete.
     Meanwhile we need to keep in place some of the prior mentioned items such as brasses, cotton waste, and other misc. parts so that we can readily repair other railroads equipment when it breaks down while it is on our property. (So if it is used on captive equipment, the train must be pure, with home road equipment only in those trains, to answer to Jeff. Or else benefits diminish accordingly.)  

     Yes, I know that monies for locomotives, other projects were borrowed however these are normally accompanied by reports of motive power or rolling stock needs written prior to the purchases. Some of those studies done by your railroad and mine covered years of compilation. After which more time where officers debated the merits.  

I do not think that anyone was consciously trying to gum up the works. I believe that it is just that - a quick quantifiable payback was hard to be found.   
     And as is stated elsewhere: If your paycheck depends on you ignoring the facts, many can find a way. And the bigger the prestige and money, the farther one will reach for reasons to ignore the truth. 
     With aspects of "siloing" which have always been in business, another departments costs is not a concern as long as it does not come out of your budget. Train delays due to hotboxes were someone else's concern, not your departments budget. And fuel usage of the C&O H-8 or PRR J-1, not out of your budget. And so on.  

       To circle back, we open files to study the freight cars, and other stock, that are by now commonly one hundred years old and wonder - why?
And have the benefit of hindsight they never enjoyed.  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      James Dick - Roseville, MN 
 
  


Re: Retired vs. Scrapped?

Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 01:17 PM, Daniel A. Mitchell wrote:
The Huckleberry Railroad in Flint, Michigan has a 3’ gauge D&RGW “short” caboose, #0526 that was officially “retired” by the D&RGW in the 1950’s, removed from the books, and was presumed scrapped for many years.
Shouldn't be any mystery here. Retired, as someone said above, means removed from revenue service, but doesn't say anything about final disposition. It could be stripped of parts and the body used as a storage shed, or it could have been sold outright, either for further use, or for use as a shed. Sold for scrap, only shows an intention. The car was sold, but the railroad really doesn't know what the buyer did with it. Very few railroads had agreements with scrap yards that equipment couldn't be resold for further use, and scrap yards were always open to making an easy buck through reselling equipment rather than having to invest the labor to cut it up.

The most definite term is destroyed. This normally means exactly what it says; the equipment was damaged beyond repair or salvage, but there are even exceptions to that.

Dennis Storzek

Dennis Storzek


Re: Friction Bearings – How Old Is This Term?

devansprr
 

Dave,

You raise a good point, and perhaps I need to be less serious about this - modelers are entitled to use whatever term they like. The engineer in me wants to be accurate, perhaps too accurate, but then the rolling characteristics of roller bearing versus "plain journal" bearings was quite different, and that has operational implications for those trying to accurately model STMFC operations.

I used to be impressed with the idea of a steam locomotive on a model railroad crawling away with a freight in tow at 1 smph. Big flywheels, great decoder, etc. But I would now challenge anyone to show me a movie of a steam locomotive sustaining a 1 mph speed for any significant distance when starting a train. Even though slack action was frowned upon, when starting a freight train with plain journal bearings, the engineer really had to take slack, reverse, and then quickly get the locomotive up to at least 2 to 3 mph until all of the slack was gone and the entire train was moving. They would have to increase the steam flow to accomplish that as the train started, but you didn't want to be any faster than 3 mph until the caboose was moving. Then and only then would the train accelerate.

Personally I think that would be a neat thing to model but YMMV....

With all roller bearings in the consists today, the need "take-slack" and then to "walk-out" the slack disappeared, so I suspect that part of the art of being a steam locomotive engineer has been lost.

As for layout owner terminology, to each his own I guess, but then I know very few PRR modelers who call their cabins "cabooses" ;-)

Dave Evans


Re: Friction Bearings – How Old Is This Term?

steve_wintner
 

I can only speculate about their mindset, but speaking as an engineer who has faced the hydrostatic vs. rolling element bearing issue in his own career in aerospace and turbomachinery, I suspect there was substantial concern about the durability and tolerance to poor maintenance. Hydrostatic bearings are very tolerant to abuse - including the direct injection of metal chips into inappropriate place, like, say, the bearing journals (ask me how I know) - whereas rolling elements are relatively fragile. The prevailing attitude amongst engineers I have worked with reflects that. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." 

Time has shown that rolling elements can be successful, I don't doubt that. But hesitancy to adopt a new, more expensive device of what seemed at the time questionable durability doesn't surprise me in the least.

As for terms, at least in my experience, I and my colleagues rarely manage to stick to standard terms across one firm, let alone an industry. Gas turbine vanes are commonly called nozzles, blades are sometimes called buckets, outer air seals are called liners, inner air seals are called diaphragms, and on and on - I imagine the railroad industry was similar (in our case, it has historical roots, mostly). Attempting to follow industry standard terminology is fine, but I imagine terms like journal, journal bearing, plain bearing, hydrostatic bearing, etc. all were found in official documents & usage.

Steve


Re: Friction Bearings – How Old Is This Term?

devansprr
 

Jeff,

Actually the C&O was an early adopter for their hoppers since many were effectively in captive service. And the benefit of roller bearings when starting a coal train was significant (as the PRR tests demonstrated, especially in cold weather.)

The C&O soon discovered that their hump yards were too steep for the roller bearing equipped hoppers - they rolled much more freely and ended up descending too fast. IIRC, in the early days of RB deployments those cars had special markings.

UP was also an early adopter for their stock car fleet - the higher speeds the roller bearings supported could, on some solid trains of stock cars, reduce schedule run time enough to eliminate a watering stop.

And you are quite correct - the prevailing view into the 1950's was that the much more expensive roller bearings would not have any "pay back" if the cars ranged widely in interchange service - especially for the smaller roads.

In addition, there were competing roller bearings that were not tapered roller bearings, and they were not as free rolling, nor as reliable, as the Timken tapered roller bearings. Eventually Timken licensed their patents to the other vendors so they could also make tapered roller bearings. I do not know if that helped reduce resistance to tapered roller bearings being adopted industry wide.

Dave Evans


Re: Still another eBay listing

O Fenton Wells
 

Clark, I love how you finished especially the interior
Fenton

On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 7:14 PM gary laakso <vasa0vasa@...> wrote:

There is a strong market for well used freight cars, Clark.  It looks really good.

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of the Missing Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Clark Propst via groups.io
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 3:31 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Still another eBay listing

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/114879864240?ul_noapp=true

Clark Propst



--
Fenton Wells
250 Frye Rd
Pinehurst NC 28374
910-420-8106
srrfan1401@...


Re: Still another eBay listing

gary laakso
 

There is a strong market for well used freight cars, Clark.  It looks really good.

 

Gary Laakso

Northwest of the Missing Mike Brock

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Clark Propst via groups.io
Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 3:31 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Still another eBay listing

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/114879864240?ul_noapp=true

Clark Propst


Re: Still another eBay listing

Matthew Hurst
 

What is the re weigh date? 

Looks great

Matthew Hurst



On Jul 5, 2021, at 6:31 PM, Clark Propst via groups.io <cepropst@...> wrote:


Still another eBay listing

Clark Propst
 

11381 - 11400 of 196982