Re: Suggestions for decaling a spare IM USRA Composite gon?
oliver
Ben,
I guess the other question is, how realistic is it for my late 1940s to mid 1950s era SP California layout to feature such a car? Would Frisco gons have been seen off line much by this time? Or at anytime for that matter? regards Stefan Typical of the Frisco, they rebuilt their USRA composite gons infive major variations, including panel steel sides, panel steel sides with sidedoors, composite cars with discharge doors, composite cars with replacementboards, Dreadnaught ends, and steel lettering boards, and 10 experimentalcar with panel sides reusing the original side stakes. See the article for more
|
|
Re: Suggestions for decaling a spare IM USRA Composite gon?
oliver
Paul,
Thanks for the heads up about the Sunshine kit. I didn't realize that he offered these cars. However, my original query was more with respect to what I could do with this spare undecorated IM kit I found in my pile of unbuilt cars, and whether there were any good decals available for a suitable prototype to add some off road flavor to my fleet. thanks again, Stefan .--- In STMFC@..., cobrapsl@a... wrote: In a message dated 3/15/2005 7:29:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,don't you just buy one from Sunshine. They just re-released them last year andMartin even had one one his CA swing.
|
|
Re: Suggestions for decaling a spare IM USRA Composite gon?
oliver
Aidrian,
Well, I was thinking about the MP cars that Ben Hom mentioned, but now I am intrigued by the Frisco cars as these seem to offer much more potential for conversion with the IM kit. I model the late 1940s to mid 1950s era on the SP so that would work. Stefan --- In STMFC@..., "Aidrian Bridgeman-Sutton" <smokeandsteam@s...> wrote: Stefanretired by the late thirties or early forties so there may not be quite so manysurvived into the post war period, though there were detail variations betweenbatches and many underwent rebuilding to a greater or lesser degree. The biggestbatches and the rebuilding which added steel sides and side doors in variouswere black - Yesteryear models offered a RTR version in the latter scheme.rebuilt and re-lettered into the new owner's standard scheme.
|
|
Re: Suggestions for decaling a spare IM USRA Composite gon?
Aidrian Bridgeman-Sutton <smokeandsteam@...>
Stefan
What timeframe are you thinking of? Many USRA gons were rebuilt or retired by the late thirties or early forties so there may not be quite so many choices if you are working to a later date. One road that IM never offered as a kit was the Frisco. They had several thousand built to the same design during the twenties and many survived into the post war period, though there were detail variations between batches and many underwent rebuilding to a greater or lesser degree. The biggest changes were the use of dreadnaught ends on the last couple of batches and the rebuilding which added steel sides and side doors in various combinations. You can use the Oddballs set for the version with side doors to cobble together enough decal an unrebuilt car. Cars painted before 1943 were red oxide and those repainted later were black - Yesteryear models offered a RTR version in the latter scheme. Another easy scheme is the old AB&C which can easily be cobbled together from data sets and Roman lettering. Be aware that this road was absorbed into the ACL in 1946 and the cars were very quickly retired, or rebuilt and re-lettered into the new owner's standard scheme. Aidrian -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.3 - Release Date: 3/15/2005
|
|
Re: nice pics
smithbf@...
Brian says:
Given other already identified schemes in the picture, clean X25 innot painted in a PRR SK scheme, which didn't start appearing to 1954. Thisscene looks late early to mid 1940's.The photo is dated 1941 Regards Bruce Bruce Smith Auburn, AL
|
|
Re: B&O Wagon Top Box - Model RR Warehouse?
Schuyler Larrabee
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- I'm surprised that CSX doesn't feel that they own theDon't give them ideas! SGL
|
|
Re: nice pics
Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
Given other already identified schemes in the picture, clean X25 in CK
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
paint, Erie 1932 box with small herald, B&O hoppers with lettering only, I think it is safe to say the middle boxcar in the back right is not painted in a PRR SK scheme, which didn't start appearing to 1954. This scene looks late early to mid 1940's. Brian J Carlson P.E. Cheektowaga NY
----- Original Message -----
From: "rwitt_2000" <rmwitt@...> To: <STMFC@...> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 10:08 AM Subject: [STMFC] Re: nice pics
|
|
Re: Digest Number 2348
Lou <loumickie@...>
Ben,
Yes, it is RC-7050. Lou Nigro ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 16 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:13:24 -0500 From: "Benjamin Hom" <b.hom@...> Subject: RE: Red CABOOSE "NYC 40 ft Sheathed Boxcar (X-29)" Lou Nigro wrote: "Rob is right, I should have said Red Caboose." Is it kit no. RC-7050? At first glance, this might appear to be another bogus Red Caboose model, but it's actually pretty accurate based on the information that we have. NYC built 100 cars in 1926 to the either the proposed 1923 ARA standard steel boxcar design or the early X29 design (NYC 97000-97099, later renumbered to NYC 128000-128099). http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/lot-504.jpg I'm hedging because this diagram is the best that we've got so far on this car. As you can see, it's pretty minimalist, but it clearly shows X29-type flat ends. Unfortunately, it doesn't confirm the number of side panels or roof type; however, the dimensions are very close to that of PRR Class X29. John Nehrich wrote to the NYCSHS requesting photos of these cars, but they replied that there were no known photos. It's rather humorous that Red Caboose offered 21 different car numbers for this 100 car lot. In reality, if you're going by fleet numbers of general service boxcars, you'd need 210 Westerfield USRA-design steel boxcars for every one of the Red Caboose kits. Ben Hom
|
|
Re: Repack dates
Hi Jerry,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks for the refresher course. Sincerely, Richard Yoder 7 Edgedale Court Wyomissing PA 19610-1913 www.richyodermodels.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry" <jrs060@...> To: <STMFC@...> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 12:41 PM Subject: [STMFC] Re: Repack dates --- In STMFC@..., "Rich Yoder" <oscale48@c...> wrote:
|
|
Re: Open and Prepay Stations
Shawn Beckert
Andy Laurent wrote:
The Official List of Open and Prepay Stations does not have any sort of comprehensive list industries and consignees. If you read the text at the heading of those lists in the "Explanation of Notes" section that Shawn mentioned, you will see that it is a list of stations that those rules apply to on a given railroad. Rules 34, 76, 99 and others have lengthy lists of industries because they are "common" car routing rules. Some railroads (the one I model - Ahnapee & Western) have no industries mentioned at all in the book. It is very hit and miss... You know Andy, the more I read your post, the more irritated I get. I never said the list was "comprehensive", I said it was extensive - and it is. Read my last paragraph again: "While the lists of stations in each annual edition of the "List" are quite large, they are not a full and complete rundown of every industry on a particular railroad." I think that about covers it. While the list of industries is nowhere near complete - and I said so - there are still thousands listed, which makes these books a useful reference for those who want some idea of what industries were served by which railroads. I stand by that statement. Shawn Beckert
|
|
Re: ADMIN: CSX, Licensing etc is out of scope. However...
Jon Miller <atsf@...>
Mike,
I just subscribed and it went fine. But if you search Yahoo groups using the name Licen you still end up with plates<VBG>. Jon Miller AT&SF For me time has stopped in 1941 Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user NMRA Life member #2623 Member SFRH&MS
|
|
Re: ADMIN: CSX, Licensing etc is out of scope. However...
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
Jon Miller writes:
I have other tried to find the Licen group but all Yahoo comes up withJon, Post message: Licen@... Subscribe: Licen-subscribe@... Unsubscribe: Licen-unsubscribe@... List owner: Licen-owner@... If you can't get in with the subscribe, let me know and I'll put you in. Mike Brock
|
|
Re: ADMIN: CSX, Licensing etc is out of scope. However...
Jon Miller <atsf@...>
Mike,
I have other tried to find the Licen group but all Yahoo comes up with is collecting license plates. What is the exact title of the group? Jon Miller AT&SF For me time has stopped in 1941 Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user NMRA Life member #2623 Member SFRH&MS
|
|
ADMIN: CSX, Licensing etc is out of scope. However...
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
Phil Buchwald says:
"I'm surprised that CSX doesn't feel that they own the rights to the wagontop car itself, never mind the graphics. After all, the wagontop is as much a symbol of the B&O as the dome herald." And, of course, CSX can lay claim to 5 letters of the alphabet...I suppose...and even the city of Baltimore and perhaps the entire state of Ohio. In that case, if the city of Baltimore chose to pay CSX tribute and if the state of Ohio chose to do the same, that would be their business...and the business of the voters of the two regions to retire those in charge for incompetence. The same could be said for anyone paying tribute to CSX for using a model of the wagontop box car. These subjects are, however,...by decree...not within the scope of the STMFC. If anyone cares to discuss such issues, I formed the Licen group a yr or so ago for just this purpose: Licen-subscribe@... Thanks, Mike Brock STMFC Owner
|
|
Re: I/M FGEX Reefer
cvsne <cv_sne@...>
Also, there is the issue that IM's
engineering plans changed, which I knew, but I was loath to changeThe original plan was indeed to tool a "high" and "low" side sill as a sort of insert plug that the modeler could glue in place to represent one or the other cars. That was indeed the first version of the plans Bill reviewed, as it was my intention to do the car that way. We found a number of issues with the car, including trying to figure out how to get the molds to work and allow us to have that sidesill as a separate piece. We also redesigned the entire car to take advantage of some new, better information, and reworking the original design to run on our faster milliing machines. Why RMJ ran the article I don't know, as the last I heard Bill S told me he would let me know before the piece went to press so we could offer some sample parts (if available, they're not yet) and deal with any of the kit engineering issues. By way of update, the design is completed and has been reviewed in house here. We still have one issue re: the bolts used on the roof rib ends. We can mold the top or bottom, but not both, easily. Once we have that figured out, and a higher priority project comes out of the milling machines, the reefer will be next. (With two HO steam era cars completed in the last six months, the GPEX milk car and the ATSF stock car, it was decided by the powers that be to pursue a different project before the FGEX car) As of next week none of this is my day to day problem of course, but since these things were frequently seen in trains in New England I really want these cars for myself. I'll have to make sure to bug Matt about them . . . Marty
|
|
Re: I/M FGEX Reefer
lnbill <bwelch@...>
Although a newby to this modeling authorship gig, having been a
newsphotographer for 13 years many years ago, I know that there can be a wide varience between what I submit and what gets used. However being on the staff and in the newsroom, it was easier in my newspaper days to influence decisions. One of my fears in submitting the article, which had a lot of photos to support and enhance the text, was that in either in editing copy or photos, that something would get left out that refered to something that got left in. I have yet to see the article but it sounds like that happened. Also, there is the issue that IM's engineering plans changed, which I knew, but I was loath to change the article until I knew what they were actually doing. Now the article is out and I still do not know what they are actually doing. I do plan to write an article on the cars designed by FGE and built for WFE and FGE that will go further than the RMJ article and it will allow me to correct any errors or misconceptions. Bill welch --- In STMFC@..., Scott Pitzer <scottp459@e...> wrote: Bill's text refers to two builders photos of FGEX cars, which donot appear in the magazine. I suppose if the editor had to leave some photos out, these should be the ones, considering the original appearance of the cars is just "background" as far as the IM models go. And the article states both the 6" and 8" side sill versions willbe made; I'm guessing IM has backed off a little since it was written? The pitfalls of an editor publishing something without running itby the author one last time... Scott Pitzerbefore IM issues the kit, and I have not seen my article in print yet.
|
|
Re: I/M FGEX Reefer
Scott Pitzer
Bill's text refers to two builders photos of FGEX cars, which do not appear in the magazine. I suppose if the editor had to leave some photos out, these should be the ones, considering the original appearance of the cars is just "background" as far as the IM models go.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
And the article states both the 6" and 8" side sill versions will be made; I'm guessing IM has backed off a little since it was written? The pitfalls of an editor publishing something without running it by the author one last time... Scott Pitzer =======
-----Original Message-----
From: lnbill <bwelch@...> Subject: [STMFC] Re: I/M FGEX Reefer I was somewhat surprized that RMJ elected to run this article before IM issues the kit, and I have not seen my article in print yet.
|
|
Re: "at great expense", ATTN: Jeff English
Ted Culotta <tculotta@...>
On Mar 16, 2005, at 10:36 AM, ed_mines wrote:
Ed: I believe that they are still $25 per print. Regards, Ted Culotta Speedwitch Media 100 14th Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94402 info@... www.speedwitch.com (650) 787-1912
|
|
"at great expense", ATTN: Jeff English
ed_mines
--- In STMFC@..., "englishintroy" <englij@r...> wrote:
in a message I posted on 2001 August 17: "At long last and at great expense, I have obtained from the NYCSHS copies of the builder's photos ....." Jeff, do you remember how much those prints cost? Do you know how much prints from NYCHS cost now? Ed Mines
|
|
Re: LNE 1923 ARA Box
Robert Daniels
Thanks Mark, I've actually been looking at that site
for a while. I just wish the photos were a little more detailed. And some photos of the ends wouldn't have hurt either. I don't think there's much chance of going back in time to 1961 to retake the photos so for now they are probably our best online resource. Rob Daniels New York, NY --- Mark Heiden <mark_heiden@...> wrote: http://www.gingerb.com/L&NE_Freight_Equipment_1961.htm
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
|
|