Date   

Re: F&C AC&F Mathieson Dry Ice Car was Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

Allen Cain
 

The box states that it would fit up to 1960 but I cannot find it in the 1955 October ORER under the SHPX reporting marks included with the decals.

If this is correct are their decals available in HO which are correct for this car in 1955?

--
Allen Cain
Modeling The Southern RR in 1955 in HO Scale

--
Allen Cain
Modeling the Southern in 1955 in HO Scale


Re: Rapido USRA double sheath and single sheath boxcar question

Allen Cain
 

What industries would have been receiving dry ice reefers in the mid 1950s?

--
Allen Cain
Modeling The Southern RR in 1955 in HO Scale

--
Allen Cain
Modeling the Southern in 1955 in HO Scale


Re: St Louis Refrigerator Car Co

Joe Pauley
 

Heres a few more


Roof ribs

Walter Cox <WaltGCox@...>
 

I am working on a six covered hopper car build and will require ribs for all 6 roofs. Is there a source for decent ribs or am I looking at scratch building them. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. The cars involved are the CNR semi clones of the AFC NYC cars. (Yeah, the old E & B Valley kits but they are the only game in town  and I have already scaled down the side ribs.)
Walt

In a message dated 5/16/2022 2:19:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, repairman87@... writes:
 
I have the General Arrangement drawings from AC&F of this car so it was definitely but by them.

I ordered one of these kits off of Ebay.  I will compare it to the drawings.  I looked at the photos of the Ebay kit and noticed the drawings indicate a miner lever hand brake not an Ajax.  Also the roof should have ribs where the seams meet.  Both of these should be easy fixes.  The underframe isn't even close to the General Arrangement drawings.  It has different cross members and the brake rigging is different.  The GA drawings call for leverage cams and other oddities for the time period.  Again certainly over comeable 

All that said I am excited to get the model.  It will build into a unique model.  Plus it's always a good day when new resin kits come out.

Scott McDonald 


Re: Rapido USRA double sheath and single sheath boxcar question

Ted Larson
 

As a kid I watched many GN trains go through town full of old SS and DS cars.  For online grain service they could have been at work past their interchange life? 




--
Ted Larson
Trainweb.org/MHRR   ---   GN in 1965   ---   NASG.org 


Re: F&C AC&F Mathieson Dry Ice Car was Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

Scott
 

I have the General Arrangement drawings from AC&F of this car so it was definitely but by them.

I ordered one of these kits off of Ebay.  I will compare it to the drawings.  I looked at the photos of the Ebay kit and noticed the drawings indicate a miner lever hand brake not an Ajax.  Also the roof should have ribs where the seams meet.  Both of these should be easy fixes.  The underframe isn't even close to the General Arrangement drawings.  It has different cross members and the brake rigging is different.  The GA drawings call for leverage cams and other oddities for the time period.  Again certainly over comeable 

All that said I am excited to get the model.  It will build into a unique model.  Plus it's always a good day when new resin kits come out.

Scott McDonald 


F&C AC&F Mathieson Dry Ice Car was Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

Bruce Smith
 

Folks,

I purchased one of the new F&C Mathieson dry ice cars at the PRRT&HS Annual meeting this week and since it does not include very much prototype data, I was curious to learn more about these cars!

For example, the box indicates 1938 as the earliest date, but the decals seem to show 1942 as a build date for one car, and 1946 for another. 

Given the SHPX markings on the early kit, is it reasonable to think the that car was built by AC&F?

Regards,
Bruce Smith


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of bounce+13731+192676+676026+2098347@groups.io <bounce+13731+192676+676026+2098347@groups.io>
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2022 8:37 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [RealSTMFC] Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943
 
CAUTION: Email Originated Outside of Auburn.


Re: PFE 9245x R-30-5 in April 1943 - still in late 1920s paint?

Jack Mullen
 

The Mars billboard reefers painted chocolate brown are fairly well known, since foobie versions have been applied to a number of inappropriate models. The post-ban plain lettered cars are less well known.  From b/w photos which showed a dark body color, I'd assumed the TMX cars remained in brown. This photo however seems to be dark green.  Anybody know more?

Jack Mullen


Re: St Louis Refrigerator Car Co

pennsylvania1954
 

Boxcar end on the left will help date the photo.
--
Steve Hoxie
Pensacola FL


Re: AAR Rules

Guy Wilber
 

Dennis wrote:

"However, I felt that his explanation of how the standard charges for repairs worked, a topic that, to my knowledge, has never been discussed here, was worth the exposure and discussion. Indeed, just today someone seemed confused how a car could be repacked on a foreign line, and the answer is simple... it's due (which is why the date of the last RPKD is stenciled on the car) do it and bill the car owner."

One of the essential fundamentals of the Interchange Rules was that foreign cars were to be treated in the same manner as home cars.  All billing costs, both labor and parts, are listed within the Interchange Rules....any time you (or anyone) has a question regarding that aspect I will do my best to answer.  The procedural part is easy and I agree that Mr. Dawson did a nice summary of the process.  

"As to side agreements to handle non-compliant cars, someplace I ran into a reference That one of the major Canadian roads agreed to handle non-compliant cars for the Pacific Great Eastern to the Vancouver docks, but not beyond the Vancouver switching district. I imagine the PGE was a signatory to the AAR Interchange agreement, but also had lots of non-compliant cars; this would allow more of their meager roster to service their traffic. The problem is, since I don't remember where I saw it, I can't say for sure if it was pre-1960."

You unknowingly answered your own question.  As long as non compliant cars remained within a switching district to be loaded or unloaded it was permitted.  NO use in interchange.  There may very well have been exceptions, but those were VERY minimal.  Pacific Great Eastern was a subscriber to the Interchange Rules.  


Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada

 
 
 

 


Re: AAR Rules

Dennis Storzek <dennis@...>
 

On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 03:53 PM, Guy Wilber wrote:
Mr. Dawson stated; "It also does not prevent individual railroads from operating non-compliant cars by agreement among themselves." 
 
Dennis, you recently made this same claim:  "The AAR regulations only governed interchange, and were based on an agreement between all the member railroads. As such, each road could use whatever "banned" equipment on its own lines, and even make side agreements to accept "banned" equipment from other roads."
I respect Mr. Dawson's contributions, he is well informed.  I do believe it is important to distinguish the differences within the periods of interest.  
Guy,
I agree completely, and since Mr. Dawson's entire career happened after our period of interest, he does not speak to the situation before his time. However, I felt that his explanation of how the standard charges for repairs worked, a topic that, to my knowledge, has never been discussed here, was worth the exposure and discussion. Indeed, just today someone seemed confused how a car could be repacked on a foreign line, and the answer is simple... it's due (which is why the date of the last RPKD is stenciled on the car) do it and bill the car owner.

As to side agreements to handle non-compliant cars, someplace I ran into a reference That one of the major Canadian roads agreed to handle non-compliant cars for the Pacific Great Eastern to the Vancouver docks, but not beyond the Vancouver switching district. I imagine the PGE was a signatory to the AAR Interchange agreement, but also had lots of non-compliant cars; this would allow more of their meager roster to service their traffic. The problem is, since I don't remember where I saw it, I can't say for sure if it was pre-1960.

Dennis Storzek 
 
 
 

 


St Louis Refrigerator Car Co

Charlie Duckworth
 

Anyone have any prototype images of the St Louis Refrigerator Cars with truss rods and know how long they lasted in service?   I’ve recently bought a spool of fishing line to do a WFEX car and have 700’ of line to use up.   

Thanks 

--
Charlie Duckworth 
Omaha, Ne.


Re: Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

Dave Nelson
 

Tweeked slightly to remove some of that red overlay and to add a bit of cyan.  No assurance of accuracy to historical facts is given.
Dave Nelson

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2022 9:23 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

 


There were dry ice reefers (attached) and later on (mid 1950's) Pure Carbonic began to operate
a fleet of insulated box cars (RB bunkerless refrigerators) and those ran into the 1970's!

Tim O'Connor


Re: AAR Rules

Guy Wilber
 

Dennis Storzek wrote:

I occasionally browse the Modern Freight Cars List, and noticed this posting last night, which I've re-posted here with Mr. Dawson's permission. Mr. Dawson was nice enough to add a little biographical information, which I've added at the bottom.

Mr. Dawson stated; "It also does not prevent individual railroads from operating non-compliant cars by agreement among themselves." 

Dennis, you recently made this same claim:  "The AAR regulations only governed interchange, and were based on an agreement between all the member railroads. As such, each road could use whatever "banned" equipment on its own lines, and even make side agreements to accept "banned" equipment from other roads."

There were no "side agreements" between railroads for use of equipment prohibited in interchange during the 1900-1960 period.  

Interchange Rule 130.  Acceptance or rejection of this Code of Rules must be as a whole, and no exception to an individual rule or rules shall be valid.

All members (railroads and private lines) signed onto and agreed to abide by the Interchange Agreement; "...the Subscriber will abide by The Code of Rules governing the condition of, repairs to, and settlements for freight cars for the interchange of traffic, as formulated and promulgated by the former Master Car Builders' Association and by The Association of American Railroads (Division V - Mechanical), or by either thereof (which rules are designated on the minutes of said Association's proceedings and are commonly known as "Interchange Rules"), and by each of said rules, and abide by each and all decisions and interpretations of The Arbitration Committee provided for by said Code of Rules..." 

"Although at one time the AAR technical committees consisted solely of representatives of operating railroads, they now have members representing private car owners and suppliers."

All the previous associations allowed representatives from private lines positions on the various committees.  Union Tank Lines and General American both had several representatives on the Tank Car Committee through the years.  Armour & Company had a representative on the Arbitration Committee as well as the Special Committee on Salt Water Drippings. 

"Even though railroads now own less than 50% of interchange freight cars, railroads still retain a majority of voting members in each committee.  Since the railroads have to live with the results of any equipment failures out on the road, this is entirely reasonable in my opinion.  The Interchange Rules themselves, which are updated twice a year, are the responsibility of the Arbitration and Rules Committee."

It was simply the Arbitration Committee during the 1900-1960 period which promulgated the Rules of Interchange.   

I respect Mr. Dawson's contributions, he is well informed.  I do believe it is important to distinguish the differences within the periods of interest.  


Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada
_._,_._,_


Re: AAR Rules

Guy Wilber
 

Dennis Storzek wrote:

“Likely the problem was introduced by Richard paraphrasing the actual text of the rule; someone (mot me) who cares about that era needs to find the actual text and make the correction.”

We’ve discussed the prohibition in interchange of non-integral side frames several times on this list; such side frames were never prohibited in interchange within the time span of this list.  I'm not sure where the confusion came from as to prohibiting non-integral side frames as there is no reference to integral or non-integral side frames within Rule 3.  Rule 17 clearly states that either type can be swapped for the other and read the same through 1960.   

1957 Rule 3, Section (t), Paragraph (3-b)  Effective January 1, 1956, cast-steel truck side frames having "I", "T" or "L" section compression or tension members, prohibited under all cars.  From owners.  Effective January 1, 1957, this requirement will apply to all cars in interchange.

1958 Rule 3, Section (t), Paragraph (3-a) (amended)  Cast-steel side frames having "I", "T" or "L" section compression or tension members, prohibited under all cars.  In interchange.

1958 Rule 17, Section (o)  U section side frames may be substituted for each other, providing capacity and wheel base correspond and truck is made safe and serviceable.  The substitution of integral for non-integral types is permissible.  Column guide clearance standard to car must be maintained.  The above substitutions only will be considered as correct repairs, charges and credits to be on basis of material applied and removed.  


Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada 



  
_._,_._,_


Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada


Re: St Louis Refrigerator Car Co

gary laakso
 

Sunshine offered two versions:one with truss rods and one without.  They were UN kits to build.

Gary Laakso
Northwest of Mike Brock


On May 14, 2022, at 4:23 AM, Charlie Duckworth <omahaduck@...> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies and images.  Lester Brewer upgraded a pre painted Accurail reefer that was done for a NMRA convention as one of his blogs.  Am thinking that’s a logical choice for a decal set.  SLRX also had bunkerless 36’ (or 34’?) reefers.  Is there a close model that could be converted to one of these cars as well?   

--
Charlie Duckworth 
Omaha, Ne.


Re: Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

Tim O'Connor
 

On 5/15/2022 5:25 PM, nyc3001 . wrote:
It looks like all of the composite cars in Tim's post were rebuilt from MDT 6000-series cars, of which there were 2,000. Hopefully there will be new resin releases of these MDT/NRC reefers as well as the M4s, which have even more possible prototype schemes.

-Phil

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Re: Dry Ice Corp reefer, DICX ?? 218? in May 1943

nyc3001 .
 

It looks like all of the composite cars in Tim's post were rebuilt from MDT 6000-series cars, of which there were 2,000. Hopefully there will be new resin releases of these MDT/NRC reefers as well as the M4s, which have even more possible prototype schemes.

-Phil


Re: Refrigerator Cars - Salt Water Drippings

Guy Wilber
 

 Bob Chaparro wrote:

"Refrigerator Cars - Salt Water Drippings
This text is from the 1925 Car Builders' Cyclopedia Of American Practice.
Note that from 1923 onward, brine in ice tanks was not to be allowed to drip on to the track. This was to prevent corrosion damage to track, bridges and electrical circuits. Brine was to be drained at icing stations."

Never rely on Car Builders' Cyclopedias for such dates without verification from other sources.  The deadline was extended to January 1, 1924.  

1923 American Railway Association Interchange Rule 3, Section (f):  After January 1, 1924, no refrigerator car equipped with brine tanks will be accepted from owner unless provided with suitable device for retaining the brine between icing stations.  

"What is not clear is whether this also applied to ice bunkers, as opposed to ice tanks. Does anyone know the answer to this?"

Strictly cars equipped with brine tanks.    

Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada


_._,_._,_


Re: St Louis Refrigerator Car Co

Charlie Duckworth
 

Doug
Thanks, I didn’t know they also had truss rod reefers. 
--
Charlie Duckworth 
Omaha, Ne.

3041 - 3060 of 195639