|
Re: Preserving Historical Media
Ray Breyer
I have jpegs scanned in 1998 and PDFs scanned in 1995 that all work just fine. Ray Breyer Elgin, IL
On Wednesday, September 8, 2021, 08:45:24 AM CDT, Edward <edb8381@...> wrote:
One of the gravest issues with digital media is that the software for retrieving and viewing becomes outdated and new operating platforms do not support older programming. It takes much effort to continually bring old files up to date for current operating compatibility. Ed Bommer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Preserving Historical Media
One of the gravest issues with digital media is that the software for retrieving and viewing becomes outdated and new operating platforms do not support older programming. It takes much effort to continually bring old files up to date for current operating compatibility.
Ed Bommer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preserving Historical Media
Jerry Michels
I firmly support what Tim and Dick have posted. For over 30 years I have cajoled people with Missouri Pacific information (slides, prints, egativers, paper items, etc.) to get them 'out of the closet' and share them with the rest of the world. I wish the idea that hoarding historical information of little monetary value is not the way to help future generations in their search for information would take hold. In fact, I think risking loss of important information to unknowing heirs is irresponsible. I have known too many hoarders who for some reason think their inaccessible information is either going to make them rich (it won't) or they attain some level of prestige by keeping information in the basement and being able to declare that they have it but won't share. I agree with Tim that paper is probably the most durable way to retain information, but that is only because we are not experienced enough in digital storage to really make a call. In the case of paper information, I lean toward scanning and saving to several sources. My own material is on a thumb drive, on my main computer, stored on an NAS drive, and backed up at a commercial site (actually in the UK). Yea, I know it is geeky, but the data is not going to be lost. I am also for giving/donating as much media to well-curated archives, such as the Missouri Pacific Historical Society's archive in St. Louis. I have been sending them digital copies and originals for a long time. There really is a good feeling associated with knowing that the material I have come across over time is preserved, and I can access it if I need it with very little trouble. It is also shareable with up and coming railroad enthusiasts. It is worth some serious consideration. Jerry Michels
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Wa Sunshine Kits...
Dick Harley
I'd say if Jack has a digital photo collection that he intends to go to the CSRM Library, why not donate it NOW? Then the rest of the world can have access and use it. Or maybe see something that gets them interested in trains or even the YVRR. Hoarding this stuff in our closets is silly. And yes, sometimes it all gets thrown away by our heirs. I have put much of my drawing collection and personal photos on my SmugMug site. Still a lot more to go, but I do work on it. https://harley-trains.smugmug.com/ Cheers, Dick Harley Laguna Beach, CA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Wa Sunshine Kits...
I think wide sharing is really is the best guarantee of -digital- preservation, at least for a generation. After I'd scanned a few thousand slides, I shared a large number of them via Dropbox. As for thousands of physical slides, I'm not really sure what to do with them, or with my library of books. It would be a shame for them to end up in a dumpster. CD's and other electronic storage is NOT archival - They do degrade over time. Paper has proven to be the most durable form of preservation, if it's well cared for - and that would include prints. Negatives and slides (depending on film type) can last a long time, although we don't really know how long that is, since it has existed for just over 100 years. So much information now exists only in electronic form - and it requires non-stop money and electricity to preserve it. It worries me. :-\ And don't get me started on cryptocurrency. It's secure - until the electricity and components that keep it alive just -poof- disappear someday in the future. Just maintaining it already uses more electricity than dozens of countries use. It is NOT climate friendly. My entire digital train photos collection is 30 GB now - so I can fit it onto a USB thumb drive. I have shared (and people have shared with me) thumb drives of photos, so that's a good way to get duplicates out there in the 'cloud' of enthusiasts. Tim O'Connor
On 9/7/2021 1:59 PM, Robert G P wrote:
--
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Wa Sunshine Kits...
Robert G P
I like your thinking jack!
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 2:06 PM Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Chris Barkan
Bruce, I agree with what you say; I misunderstood the intended meaning of the title of Charlie Duckworth's original post so thank you for the clarification.
As for Steve's point about ACF's and GA's use of the term "type". As you probably know, several of Richard Hendrickson's articles published in the 1990s suggest that this was indeed ACF's nomenclature. Here is a quote from his July 1997 RMJ article entitled AC&F Type 27 ICC-103 10,000-Gallon Tank Cars, "Both of the major American tank car builders, American Car & Foundry and General American, assigned type numbers to each new design indicating the year in which it first appeared. Thus AC&F Type 27 tank cars were introduced in 1927, replacing the Type 21 design that dated from 1921. The Type 27 then continued in production through the Great Depression and WWI I until it was discontinued in favor of all welded tank cars in the late 1940s" Richard's wording suggests that it was indeed GA practice to do this as well but he does not cite a reference. ACF's practice is clearly described on page 217 of Ed Kaminski's ACF Tank Car book but I have no comparable reference for GA. If anyone else does perhaps they can share what can be learned from that. Chris Barkan Champaign, IL -- Chris Barkan Champaign, IL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: used to load and unload steam era freight cars...
Andy Laurent
On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 12:07 PM, Claus Schlund \(HGM\) wrote:
The foundation for that NJI&I crane is still visible in South Bend, IN right here at the corner of Edward and McPherson Streets: https://goo.gl/maps/onHpE16Si4rQW5r57
AndyThe diamond that the NJI&I used to cross the NYC (SS&S) to reach Studebaker Corp was immediately north of that crane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Another big challenge with the English language includes our use of different words for similar things. Here it is Class and Type.
Chris quoted from a document in an earlier post. MCB, later ARA and then ICC specifications differentiated between “Classes” of tank cars.
ACF used the word “Type” together with a year to designate significant design changes in its tank cars, although construction of Types often overlapped. So, the F&C kit is an MCB/ARA Class II AND an ACF Type 11, while the P2k car is a an ARA Class III and an ACF Type 21.
To further challenge us, UTLX referred to their designs as “Classes.” So, their Class X and Class V cars were MCB/ARA Class II. To meet the ARA Class III specs (to which they were a party in the creation) UTLX created their Class X-3 cars, whose design evolved over the next 20 or so years.
I am not sure whether the Type+Year designations we use for General American tank car designs come from the company or us modelers.
Steve Hile
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Chris Barkan
Thanks Tim. I just now saw Eric's message above about this as well. If it was built in the interval 1903 - 1917 then it is an ARA Type II. If the ACF designation "11" reflects, built in 1911 then by definition, it was both a Type 11 and a Type II. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Chris Barkan
Thanks Tim. I just now saw Eric's message above about this as well. If it was built in the interval 1903 - 1917 then it is an ARA Type II. If the ACF designation "11" reflects, built in 1911 then by definition, it was both a Type 11 and a Type II. :-)
I have not seen the photos that have it stenciled as a Type III, if you, or Eric or anyone wishes to post them, I'd like seeing them. -- Chris Barkan Champaign, IL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Central Ohio RPM is happening Sept 23-25
Denis: maybe it’s on the site but I didn’t see it: any tentative clinic list? Thanks
Frank
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Chris ACF (?) numbered the designs of the underframe from the first year of production - That's what I understood, at least. So ACF Type-21 1921, ACF Type-27, 1927, and so on. I think the model is an ACF Type-11. It may also be an ARA Type II, as you describe - but photos shows ARA III stencils. The (?) means I don't know if these types are ACF builder designations, or railfan designations. Tim O'Connor
On 9/6/2021 3:07 PM, Chris Barkan wrote:
A small correction/clarification to this thread title; I think that the F&C kit is intended to represent a Type II, as in roman numeral "two", not a Type 11, as in "eleven". --
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Chris,
We've been down this road before. The F&C kit represents BOTH an AC&F type 11 and AAR/ARA type 2. Calling it an AC&F type 11 is FAR more descriptive than calling it an ARA type 2, since every tank built after the adoption on the type 2 designation up until
the introduction of Type 3 circa 1917 (and some built to war emergency designs during WWII) was a "type 2".
Regards,
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Chris Barkan <cplbarkan@...>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 2:07 PM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> Subject: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] ACF Type 11 Tankcar
For those unfamiliar with the early tank car designations, I have excerpted several explanatory sentences from Tom Dalrymple's chapter on tank cars in the 1997 Car & Locomotive Cyclopedia. Tom's history was in turn derived from Frank Heller's 1970 ASME paper entitled "Evolution of Tank Car Design Through Engineering" (In 1973 Heller republished the paper re-titled as "A history of tank cars" in the The Bulletin of the National Railway Historical Society, Vol. 38, No.1 pp 17-35, 51.) "In 1903, the Master Car Builders' Association, composed of mechanical representatives of the railroads, and a representative of Standard Oil formed a Tank Car Committee and drafted the first recommended practices for the design and construction of
tank cars. ... All cars built prior to 1903 were designated Class I and cars built thereafter were designated Class II"
"In 1917, the Master Car Builders' Association began to develop standards that sought to match the specifications of tank cars to the commodities that they were authorized to transport. Class I cars were restricted to non-flammable, non-hazardous commodities.
Class II tank cars could no longer be built, and two new classes III and IV were established."
-- In 1927, when the ICC assumed authority for tank car specifications for hazardous commodities, "...ARA III became ICC 103, ARA IV became ICC 104, etc." Chris Barkan Champaign, IL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Chris Barkan
A small correction/clarification to this thread title; I think that the F&C kit is intended to represent a Type II, as in roman numeral "two", not a Type 11, as in "eleven".
For those unfamiliar with the early tank car designations, I have excerpted several explanatory sentences from Tom Dalrymple's chapter on tank cars in the 1997 Car & Locomotive Cyclopedia. Tom's history was in turn derived from Frank Heller's 1970 ASME paper entitled "Evolution of Tank Car Design Through Engineering" (In 1973 Heller republished the paper re-titled as "A history of tank cars" in the The Bulletin of the National Railway Historical Society, Vol. 38, No.1 pp 17-35, 51.) "In 1903, the Master Car Builders' Association, composed of mechanical representatives of the railroads, and a representative of Standard Oil formed a Tank Car Committee and drafted the first recommended practices for the design and construction of tank cars. ... All cars built prior to 1903 were designated Class I and cars built thereafter were designated Class II"
"In 1917, the Master Car Builders' Association began to develop standards that sought to match the specifications of tank cars to the commodities that they were authorized to transport. Class I cars were restricted to non-flammable, non-hazardous commodities. Class II tank cars could no longer be built, and two new classes III and IV were established."
-- In 1927, when the ICC assumed authority for tank car specifications for hazardous commodities, "...ARA III became ICC 103, ARA IV became ICC 104, etc." Chris Barkan Champaign, IL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] ACF Type 11 Tankcar
I didn't replace the rivets, like Bill did, but I did do a number of upgrades to the F&C kit. I did remove the rivet lines for the fradial courses on the bottom longitudinal course, as well as the bottom centerline rivets, as neither are accurate. One of the
glaring omissions to me was the absence of the tank anchors. I also used precision scale brass handrail stanchions. I made the first one I built into a PRR TM8 class car, in company service. Shamelss plug - I wrote this build up in The Keystone Modeler, #61,
August, 2008 😉
Regards,
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of william darnaby <wdarnaby@...>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 9:17 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> Subject: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] ACF Type 11 Tankcar
A few years back I finished three of these guys and they can be built into nice models. The tank is crude because, as somebody mentioned, a brass model was used as the master resulting in the rivet detail being faint to nonexistent. The solution
is to scrape all of them off and replace with Archer rivets. I am pretty sure I used Speedwitch decals for the DX and Mobil versions that I have.
Bill Darnaby
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Wa Sunshine Kits...
Jack Turn them into a massive NFT (non-fungible token). Everybody's doing it ! And then sell it for millions ! :-) If it's in The Cloud, then it's safe. Or so we are led to believe. :-D Tim O'Connor
On 9/5/2021 7:38 PM, Jack Burgess wrote:
--
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
I agree. I probably would have thrown it against the wall before getting that far. :-D I don't know why but frames remain very problematic with resin tank cars. Tim O'
On 9/6/2021 9:58 AM, Paul Doggett via groups.io wrote:
Ian --
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Looks good Steve Nicely done fenton
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 12:23 PM Steve SANDIFER <steve.sandifer@...> wrote:
--
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Ian
thanks for the review; after building the high walkway tankcar a year ago I just couldn’t put myself through building another F&C tankcar and it didn’t have near the issues you mentioned with the Type 11 kit. -- Charlie Duckworth Omaha, Ne.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACF Type 11 Tankcar
Steve SANDIFER
My version, Ted’s decals. I have two, one the F&C and one the Sunset. I purchased the Sunset painted white with Ethyl paint scheme, stripped it, added underbody details, and painted it.
J. Stephen Sandifer
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ian MacKellar
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 10:59 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] ACF Type 11 Tankcar
DX with the Speedwitch decals
|
|
|
|