Date   

Attention!

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Attention! Achtung! Attencion!

The STMFC is pleased to announce that Byron Rose will be returning to active
participation by joining the STMFC. Although Byron indicates he is going to
do it on a trial basis, we will at least have his in depth and "interesting"
comments and views for awhile. I look forward to his remarks.

Mike Brock
STMFC moderator...What have I done...<G>


Re: So why are we doing this?

Gail & Tom Madden <tgmadden@...>
 

So.... I see fourteen names in the "Members" list so far, all but two of
whom I either know personally or have had extensive e-mail correspondence
with. I'm flattered to be included, but I figure I'm already part of this
particular group with or without a new list.

I like the thought of some sort of refuge where we can go off and discuss
things candidly without being badgered by the Great Unwashed, but we need to
be careful - from their viewpoint there's no discernable difference between
the Algonquin Round Table and a bunch of elite snobs holding forth in
private.

There were 199 members in the Passenger Car List when I took it to eGroups
in late September. There are now 271. On eGroups you'll be noticed and, like
it or not, you'll end up with an uncontrolled body of subscribers. If the
purpose of this list is to escape from the newbies, vesties, train set
whatevers and general nuisances, there must be some sort of control on who
subscribes. I'm not advocating this, just pointing out that when you
publicize paradise, it eventually gets overrun.

One other thing to watch out for - the archives are open to any subscriber
at any time, on out into the future. In these very early posts some of us
may be a bit too candid because it's "just among friends". Mike, you might
want to think about deleting some of these "board of directors" posts from
the archives eventually.

Tom "devil's advocate" Madden
who thinks the only good freight cars are red, black, orange or yellow, and
who favors cutting things off just before the McGinnis NH/B&M color
explosions.


Re: The steam era, 1960

Richard Hendrickson
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

So what say you, steam fans? Can I offer you research into Hydroframe
60 PS-1's, or 90 ton, 4000 cubic foot covered hoppers, or 86 foot box
cars, as well as end-of-life dispositions of single sheathed cars and wood
ice reefers? All these things happened in the tumultuous early 1960's.

To say nothing of piggyback cars and trailers of the 1950's up to 1966!
BOOORING! Let's hear it for Andrews trucks, truss rod underframes, outside
metal roofs, and Murphy corrugated ends.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: The steam era, 1960

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Tim O'Connor...who will probably have to retake his class on steam
history... writes:

Didn't UP run steam into 1960? I think 4-8-8-4's would have to qualify
as legitimate steam...
1960? UP STILL runs steam. 844...renumbered to 8444 for awhile....has never
been removed from the roster. It and 3985 still provide SOME degree of class
to today's RRs. OTOH, the last Big Boy ran in '59.

For myself, I prefer the cutoff date of December 1966, when the current
appearance of house cars was ordained, i.e. running boards were no longer
required on box cars and reefers.
Hard to imagine the age of steam to have run to '66 even with UP's single
locomotive. The trouble with that date is it a bit arbitrary...with little
supporting evidence. Add to that, both Supreme Courts will overrule it.

Mike Brock


Re: The steam era, 1960

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

Mike and all,

Didn't UP run steam into 1960? I think 4-8-8-4's would have to qualify
as legitimate steam...

For myself, I prefer the cutoff date of December 1966, when the current
appearance of house cars was ordained, i.e. running boards were no longer
required on box cars and reefers. Also, by 1966, reefers in ice service had
declined precipitously.

Some Classic Trains was published in 1964, so that is another milestone
date for me, very close to the end of genuine "classy varnish" on western
railroads. (The Seattle World's Fair of 1964-1965 was the last high point
for NP and GN before the rapid slide towards 1971.)

So what say you, steam fans? Can I offer you research into Hydroframe
60 PS-1's, or 90 ton, 4000 cubic foot covered hoppers, or 86 foot box
cars, as well as end-of-life dispositions of single sheathed cars and wood
ice reefers? All these things happened in the tumultuous early 1960's.

To say nothing of piggyback cars and trailers of the 1950's up to 1966!

----- Original Message -----
From: <MDelvec952@aol.com>
Subject: [STMFC] The steam era, 1960


It is commonly regarded by the more formal historian and professional museum
community that the end of the steam era was 1960. The late 1950s still saw
some Class 1 steam, while the 1960s saw steam only on a few short lines and
in Canada. Rolling stock, too, made a big leap in the 1960s, as Richard
pointed out.


The STMFC...Objectives, Reasons and Processes

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Guys,
There have been several messages regarding the objectives, reasons for
initiating and methodology of the Steam Era Freight Car Group including its
relation to the current FCL. A few answers are probably appropriate. First,
let me present the description of the group that I have placed in the Egroup
description area:

"The purpose of this list is to discuss all aspects of North American
freight cars of the steam era [ 1900-1960 ]. The objectives include the
sharing of information about railroad freight cars including their operation
and various techniques of building models of them. Emphasis is to be placed
on the study of the prototype with a goal of producing models of them with
as great a degree of accuracy as possible."

As I mentioned in my introductory message, I have felt for a year or so that
a steam era FC list might have advantages. The obvious one is that the range
of historical subject matter will be reduced. Currently the completely open
range of the FCL allows many more posts than might be produced by one
confined to a specific period. A second and, perhaps, more significant
advantage is that there is a more specific objective than merely having
discussions about freight cars. To use an analogy, one might consider the
FCL as the NMRA and the Steam Era Freight Car Group as a SIG.

Some have expressed a hope that messages might be greatly reduced. I make no
claim for this. After all, I am not exactly innocent of producing strictly
technical posts and can run my keyboard with the best. I will attempt to
generate an archival capability to perhaps provide a solution for those
preferring reduced numbers of posts.

It has been pointed out that we see the same subjects discussed every now
and then on the FCL. This will no doubt continue but probably to a lesser
extent on the STMFC. Jeff Aley asks, "should I just commit the ACF book and
RPC to memory?" [ Actually, Jeff is one that just might be able to do it ].
I don't think so.

Dave Nelson mentions that we should have "adult opinions and skins." I
believe those are admiral traits which we should emulate. However, I would
add that we are discussing a hobby. I strongly suggest that we not overlook
the value of humor in our discussions.

Currently, membership is open without restrictions. As moderator, I can
require approval at any time.

There has been mention of the time period. I based this on the sad fact that
the last Big Boy ran in 1959. I added one yr because I wanted to [ and
Richard suggested it ].

I would appreciate any suggestions you guys have regarding the above
comments and any other views.

I would also mention that, while I will be acting as moderator, I am asking
Richard Hendrickson, Tony Thompson, and Tim O'Connor to be unofficial
"board" members to keep me in line. I would also ask Jeff Aley and Tim to
assist in using the Egroup technical capabilities.

Mike Brock
STMFC Moderator............now....about those N&W hoppers...


Re: So why are we doing this?

Richard Hendrickson
 

Dave Nelson writes:

- I understand opinions vary on when the steam era ended. I think <=1956 is
generous.
That's probably about right; some steam survived later, but not much.
However, I'm inclined toward ca. 1960 as a cutoff because, give or take a
year or two, that was the beginning of what I regard as the modern era:
roller bearings, cushion underframes, mechanical reefers, etc. Prior to
1960, only a few more or less experimental cars had those features, and
freight car technology wasn't much different than in 1950.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: Used book sites

Richard Hendrickson
 

Thanks, Jeff. Just what I need - another way to spend money!

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: Used book sites

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

In the interest of making the STMFC more useful, I will compile a simple
document containing links to internet railroad book dealers, and will keep
it reasonably up to date, and the document will be maintained in the files
area of STMFC. I will start with Jeff's list and a few dozen (!) that I have
found myself over the past few years...

This is one of the features about egroups that I really like. For example a
member of the steamloco group compiled a list of prototypes for HO
scale non-brass steam locomotive models. That type of thing has real
value, IMO.

If people wanted to use STMFC to preview articles, or just "publish" in
the files area, I think that would be great! We could use STMFC for
serious sharing and collaboration, whereas FCL is for general "probing"
for information and modeling chat.

P.S. As Jeff notes, there is a difference between booksellers and "index"
(or "portal") web sites. I will keep them separate in the list.

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@pcocd2.intel.com>
To: <STMFC@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Used book sites


While we're still off topic, you may also find http://www.bibliofind.com/
to be helpful. Note that neither Advanced Book Exchange (ABE) nor
Bibliofind are actual booksellers. Instead they contain listings from
many smaller book dealers. As a result, each web site might find the same
book.

Other search sites:

http://www.bookfinder.com/
http://www.ippi.com/antiquarian-archive.html
http://www.alibris.com/home.cfm


Re: So why are we doing this?

Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@...>
 

As we continue to talk about talking about freight cars, :-) WRT binaries,
they shouldn't be mailed out, but put in the shared files area. The
ReeferMadness list (all refrigerator cars, all the time) does this quite
effectively, though most of the images are of (yuk) mechanical reefers.
The PrototypeModelers have recently uploaded sections of video (!) that
show specific freight car door hardware. [Now *that's* multimedia at its
finest!]

Regards,

-Jeff

P.S. Has Harley unsubscribed yet? I don't think we've had an actual
freight car discussion yet...

On Dec 12, 7:32pm, Tim O'Connor wrote:
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: So why are we doing this?
P.P.S. How do people feel about binaries attached to messages? Sometimes
it would be just so much easier to SHOW people what you're talking about
rather than try to describe it.
--
Jeff Aley, Development Engineer jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
Graphics Components Division
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: So why are we doing this?

Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Richard writes on his reasoning for a new group:

1. ... 33,000 gal. tank cars....
2. I'm tired of being abused as an elitist snob....
3. I'm tired of the same old topics being discussed ... by new
subscribers who
weren't around when they were discussed before.
Item 1 can be addressed by establishing a different, group. The only way to
deal with item 2 is to keep the new group closed, by invitation only. Dunno
if egroups allows for that. Dunno what Mike wants either.

At any rate, what I'd like is (no particular order):

- Fine scale modeling of freight cars. Model railroading including freight
cars is meerly a coincidental interest. I can join Jim Six's group or stay
with the FC list would my priorites to reverse.

- my personal interests of historical research at the fleet level (ORER, ICC
stuff, industrial stuff, etc.) remaining welcome.

- All historical material relevant to support fine scale modeling.

- Persons having both adult opinions and skins.

- I understand opinions vary on when the steam era ended. I think <=1956 is
generous.

- While not yet an author, I have appreciated and learned from much of the
discussion over on the FC list on issues faced by authors of material on
these topics.

I could go on....

On a technical level, I do like egroups web access, searching capability,
file storage, and opinion polling -- very much an improvement compared to
FC.

Dave Nelson


Re: So why are we doing this?

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

I agree with Dick Harley. I would like someplace where there is only serious
discussion of freight cars, and not a lot of chit-chat, and no declarations of one's
preference for the "three foot rule" etc. Limiting it to pre-1960 freight cars is not
entirely my preference but if that's how you all feel... People like myself and Bill
Kelly and Jim Eager are seriously interested in post-1960 freight cars too, and at
the moment there is no mailing list other than FCL for that.

An egroups moderator has the power to approve or eject subscribers. I have
occasionally reminded steamloco members not to stray from the subject of the
mailing list, and I haven't noticed any serious violations. Although the recent
flareup of discussions of styrene and plastics is kinda pushing the envelope...

P.S. Dick, thanks for posting the Union Pacific drawings file. I think that type
of information will make the STMFC a useful resource. Dick's "three useful
messages a week" sounds like a worthy goal.

P.P.S. How do people feel about binaries attached to messages? Sometimes
it would be just so much easier to SHOW people what you're talking about
rather than try to describe it.


Re: So why are we doing this?

Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@...>
 

On Dec 12, 3:27pm, Richard Hendrickson wrote:
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: So why are we doing this?
3. I'm tired of the same old topics being discussed at length every few
months, often with more heat than light, prompted by new subscribers who
weren't around when they were discussed before (and haven't consulted
the
digest to find that out).
This, in my opinion, is one of the great weaknesses of Mr. Hosker's list.
The last time I tried to search the archives, well, I couldn't. Suppose
I want to know how to tell a correct RC R-30-12-9 from the incorrect
version.
I have no intention of performing 48 different searches for "Red Caboose
PFE" (one for each month in the archive).

Thus, if I wanted to know, I'd have to ask again. (Actually, I keep my
own personal archive of messages that I think will be of future interest.
But I shouldn't have to.)

Regards,

-Jeff

--
Jeff Aley, Development Engineer jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
Graphics Components Division
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: Used book sites

Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@...>
 

While we're still off topic, you may also find http://www.bibliofind.com/
to be helpful. Note that neither Advanced Book Exchange (ABE) nor
Bibliofind are actual booksellers. Instead they contain listings from
many smaller book dealers. As a result, each web site might find the same
book.

Other search sites:

http://www.bookfinder.com/
http://www.ippi.com/antiquarian-archive.html
http://www.alibris.com/home.cfm


Best of luck!

-Jeff


On Dec 12, 6:37pm, MDelvec952@aol.com wrote:
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Used book sites
In a message dated 12/12/00 6:11:44 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rhendrickson@opendoor.com writes:

I tried http://www.abebooks.com/ and found two copies, and some
>other interesting stuff.

I tried that website and it wouldn't come up. ???

Try it again, Richard. Or try simply AbeBooks.com. I tried it, and
the
site is just wonderful. There's hardly a used railway title I couldn't
find
on it. Even found a copy of "Painting of Railway Equipment,"
Simmons-Boardman 1924, written by Lackawanna shopforeman Miller. I've
only
ever seen one other copy in circulation. I bought it. Two copies of
Shay
Locomotive are on there -- that's just about the rarest of the rare.

Thanks, Jeff Aley, for suggesting the site.

All the best, ....Mike
--
Jeff Aley, Development Engineer jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
Graphics Components Division
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: Attention!

MDelvec952
 

In a message dated 12/12/00 11:39:05 PM Eastern Standard Time,
brockm@brevard.net writes:

The STMFC is pleased to announce that Byron Rose will be returning to active
participation by joining the STMFC. Although Byron indicates he is going to
do it on a trial basis, we will at least have his in depth and
"interesting"
comments and views for awhile. I look forward to his remarks.
I'm on the phone with Byron as we speak, reading him this note. "Now I guess
I'm committed," sez he, amongst many other things.

He'll be on. ....Mike


Re: Used book sites

thompson@...
 

I tried http://www.abebooks.com/ and found two copies, and some
other interesting stuff.
I tried that website and it wouldn't come up. ???
I have gotten the message "refused by server" on this site several times
this afternoon. But the URL is presumably good.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history


Re: Used book sites

Gail & Tom Madden <tgmadden@...>
 

Mike,

I tried http://www.abebooks.com/ and found two copies, and some
other interesting stuff.
I tried that website and it wouldn't come up. ???

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520

Try again.

Tom M.


Re: Used book sites

Richard Hendrickson
 

Mike,

I tried http://www.abebooks.com/ and found two copies, and some
other interesting stuff.
I tried that website and it wouldn't come up. ???

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Tank Car Journeys

Richard Hendrickson
 

Dave Nelson wrote, in response to Jeff Aley,

For example, I recently learned that I need to ship sulfuric acid to
a corn mill (acid was used to produce corn oil). What kind of car do
I use (and more importantly, how can I find out for myself?)?
Find _Tank Car Journeys_ in some used bookstore on the net. It's from the
30's and does a nice job of describing all sorts of stuff that went in tank
cars. In some instances it explains quite a bit about individual industries
too.
Actually, there are two such books. General American Tank Car Journeys was
published by GATC in 1931 (under the title it says "Vol. 1" but there never
was a second volume). An earlier book was Standard Tank Car Journeys
published in 1920 by the Standard Tank Car Co. I have copies of both (but
my GATC book is on loand from Tom Madden and I'd like to find a copy of my
own). I can copy the sections on specific commodities from either or both
for subscribers to this list.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: So why are we doing this?

Richard Hendrickson
 

Jeff Aley wrote:

Hmm. I wonder how many others are banned from FCL? Perhaps we should
invite Byron to join this list...
I did. Whether he does so remains to be seen. (I'm reminded of the old
Groucho Marx line, "I'd never belong to a club which would have me as a
member.")

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520

183281 - 183300 of 183313