On Aug 27, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Richard Brennan wrote:

Browsing through Kaminski's AC&F Centennial History book; the last
ACF tank car builder's photo I see with high walkways is circa-1915,
and the first with a modern (or should that be moderne?) tank-top
operating platform is dated 1934 .

Both AC&F and the Standard Tank Car Co. (then the largest producer of tank cars in North America) built tank cars of standard design with high running boards until ca. 1915, and Union Tank Line Class V and X cars of that era (by several different builders) had running boards about 1/3 of the way up the sides of the tank. It's not clear why the practice of building tank cars with high running boards was discontinued, but trainmen doubtless complained vigorously about having to climb down the ladders on adjacent cars to gain access to tank car end sills and then having to climb up the ladders to the high running board. reversing the process at the other end of the car. At any rate, the United States Safety Appliance regulations that initially took effect in 1911 had provisions for both high mounted and low mounted tank car running boards but those for Class III tank cars built after 1917 assume that the running boards will be approximately level with the top of the center sills, so apparently no cars of Class III specification were built with high running boards.

What occasioned these changes.. and why was there such a long
transition period to the now universal top platform design? It
appears that cars without platforms were built well into the late
1950s... Was it simply buyer preference... or was there a change in
AAR or DOT regulations?

As for railed dome platforms, those began to appear in the 1920s on cars which were loaded and unloaded through the dome rather than through bottom outlets, or which required workmen to access the top of the car to connect steam lines to the car's heating coils. Some buyers specified platforms while others made do with narrow walkways alongside the domes (often on only one side of the car) depending on the loading and unloading arrangements the cars were likely to encounter in service. Such dome platforms were required on Class V (high pressure) tank cars, as their "domes" were in fact not expansion domes but valve casings, and these cars were loaded and unloaded entirely through the valves and connections inside the casings. Other types of tank cars continued to be built well into the 1960s without such platforms.

Richard Hendrickson

Dean Payne wrote:
"Any photos of these cars [NP 14000 series boxcars], prototype or other
scale?"

Ted's Steam Era Freight Cars website is still there, you know:
http://www.steamfreightcars.com/gallery/boxauto/np14160main.html


"Funaro also makes some NP 40' DS boxcars, but with truss rods, in a
different # series, so that can't be
correct. Perhaps similar in appearance, though."

...in that they're both 40 ft DS boxcars with radial roof with a definite NP
"family" appearance, but they are NOT the same car.
http://www.steamfreightcars.com/gallery/boxauto/np39731main.html
http://www.fandckits/HO/1007.html
http://www.fandckits/HO/1008.html

The corresponding HO scale kits are the Sunshine 52.x series kits.


Ben Hom

At 05:51 PM 8/27/05, Gary Laakso wrote:

Subject: RE:
I understood that the Milwaukee was one of the first railroads to place
roller bearings on its heavy weight passenger cars. Does anyone know if
the use of roller bearings included express reefers on the Milwaukee?

The only traditional express reefers that the Milwaukee owned with two series of distinctive low slung cars built by the Milwaukee shops fortheChicago Milwaukee & Puget Sound,and they were lettered "For Fish Service Only". Photos of these cars are few are far between, and several lasted to about 1953, To my knowledge, they never had roller bearings applied, and they were generally retired from front line work in about 1934.

I am having a brain bubble (I am also on vacation and away from sources) so am absolutely unsure whether or not the Milwaukee built several ribside reefers in c. 1941. If so, my impression is that they were primarily for freight service and did not have roller bearings. I am prepared to be corrected.

Of interest is that although the Milwaukee leaped into the roller bearing business four square for their prime passenger equipment after 1928, they never did so with their freight cars.

Denny

Richard Brennan wrote:

Browsing through Kaminski's AC&F Centennial History book . . .
and the first with a modern (or should that be moderne?) tank-top
operating platform is dated 1934 .
. . . why was there such a long
transition period to the now universal top platform design? It
appears that cars without platforms were built well into the late
1950s... Was it simply buyer preference... or was there a change in
AAR or DOT regulations?

I am not sure why you think platforms are more "modern." As I understand it, they are just a reflection of what a buyer orders. Before World War II there were not very many tank cars in chemical service, and so the need for access to specialized valves and fittings did not exist. This is described and illustrated in Kaminski's book on AC&F tank cars.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

Hello,

Kodak are not the only suppliers on Planet Earth who manufacture and
supply photographic paper.

For b&w, I only use Ilford products. A search for Ilford on Google,
for a start, came up with

http://www.ausmedia.com.au/ilford.htm

Regards,

Glen Mills

On Aug 27, 2005, at 9:04 AM, Montford Switzer wrote:

This has been quite a lengthy thread and this may have been covered
earlier. Anyway one reason for the railroads NOT to invest in roller
bearing trucks was that the cars spent a lot of time off line benefiting
another railroad that may not have made a similar investment.

Mont is, as usual, correct. Immediately following WW II, several railroads equipped freight cars with roller bearings for on-line service (e.g., the Union Pacific's Day Livestock Service stock cars, the C&O's unit train hoppers). But none of the North American railroads were willing to spend the extra money to equip cars in interchange service with roller bearings, since other RRs would then get much of the benefit without having to spend their own capital. As 100 ton nominal capacity freight cars began to appear in growing numbers in the late 1950s, however, it was found that solid bearing trucks would not perform reliably carrying that much weight, and once the application of roller bearing trucks to 100 ton cars became common practice, the resistance to putting them on cars of lower capacity rapidly diminished, especially as their elimination of hot journals came to be increasingly appreciated by both mechanical and operating departments. By the way, this has all been covered in published sources as well as in previous discussions on the STMFC list, so the recent deluge on the list of opinion and speculation masquerading as fact on this subject is really quite unwarranted, not to say tiresome for those of us who have been paying attention to these matters for a long time.

With regard to terminology, I will say yet again what Tony Thompson has already asserted on this subject, that "friction bearing" was a term used as a promotional ploy by the roller bearing manufacturers to imply that roller bearing were "non-friction bearings," which is, of course, nonsense. That it may have gained some currency in later years with railroad employees is beside the point. During the steam/transition era, which is our concern on this list, the terms used almost universally in the railroad engineering literature for conventional bearings were "solid" or "plain" bearings, as anyone can determine by spending a little time reading that literature (e.g., Car Builders' Cyclopedias and periodicals such as Railway Mechanical Engineer). That an exception to this practice was found in a single, rather dated, publication proves nothing to the contrary.

Those of us on this list who carry out serious prototype research generally prefer to use the terms that were common to the engineering literature where different from those used by the working stiffs who ran trains and maintained rolling stock, a preference which in no way reflects any lack of respect for the working stiffs but does reflect a desire for clarity and consistency. Others on the list may, of course, use any terminology they like, but should be aware that their choices may lead others to doubt their seriousness and their credibility.

Richard Hendrickson

Re N Scale NP 7 CN resin cars:

--- Dean Payne <deanpayne@netscape.com> wrote:

Any photos of these cars, prototype or other scale?
Is the reefer
the same one Funaro and Camerlengo makes in HO?

http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/279-5131

You are right, the F&C car is the same car that GHQ
will be offering.

I have some slides of the 14000 series NP boxcar, but
I have not yet scanned them.
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

All

Browsing through Kaminski's AC&F Centennial History book; the last ACF tank car builder's photo I see with high walkways is circa-1915, and the first with a modern (or should that be moderne?) tank-top operating platform is dated 1934 .

What occasioned these changes.. and why was there such a long transition period to the now universal top platform design? It appears that cars without platforms were built well into the late 1950s... Was it simply buyer preference... or was there a change in AAR or DOT regulations?


===============================
Richard Brennan - San Leandro, CA
mailto:brennan8@earthlink.net
===============================

On Saturday, August 27, 2005, at 10:54 AM, ed_mines wrote:

Anyone know anything about the Pittsburgh freight car book that was
supposed to be released at the NMRA convention?

The Fowler box car Ed Hawkins' was going to produce?

Ed Mines

Ed,
I don' know where your second question came from, but you must have me
mixed up with somebody else. I've never been in the business to make
Fowler box cars.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins

Any photos of these cars, prototype or other scale? Is the reefer
the same one Funaro and Camerlengo makes in HO?

http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/279-5131

At $30 ea. less trucks and couplers, it looks like the N Scale
offering is priced right. Funaoro also makes some NP 40' DS boxcars,
but with truss rods, in a different # series, so that can't be
correct. Perhaps similar in appearance, though.
Dean Payne

Maybe there will be more discussions on freight cars there than here<GG>

So as not to be off topic, has anyone converted a tank car with the low walkways into one of the older cars with the high walkways? Canadian National had some of these in their fleet and I'd like to make one sometime.

Don't forget to change the subject line when you reply!!

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.16/83 - Release Date: 8/26/05

Given that there is some interest in listing and discussing railroad
associated meets, train shows, and gatherings, I have created a new group:
RREVNT@yahoogroups.com

expressly for such purposes. To subscribe:

RREVNT-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Members are free to discuss any aspect of a RR gathering...within, of course, the group's rules. This includes Springfield, Mass., Springfield, Missouri, Springfield, IL, Springfield, OR, Springfield, OH, or even Springfield, FL...wherever that is....or any other Springfield...God, how many are there?<G>. You can even list and discuss the show at Tareja, Russia...if you can find it.

Here are the group's rules:

This group is a forum and repository to list and discuss railroad associated
meets, shows, conventions and similar gatherings.

Personal attacks on other members is expressly prohibited and may result in
expulsion from the group.

Attacks on meets, shows, conventions and similar gatherings are
prohibited and may result in expulsion from the group.

ALL SUBJECTS OTHER THAN THOSE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH RAILROAD
ASSOCIATED GATHERINGS ARE PROHIBITED.

Threads or subjects may be terminated only by myself or my
representatives. When threads/subjects are terminated, members are expected
to avoid sending messages associated with such threads/subjects.

All references to politics or political views are prohibited.

Members must sign messages with their full names.

Members may at any time bring any matter relating to
the RREVNT to me privately for consideration.

Members may announce the particulars about any RR gathering as a
message and also include it in the files section.

Mike Brock
RREVNT Owner

Does anyone have an email address for Dr. Muff of KCS fame? It's freight car related, Mike....

Regards,
Ted Culotta

Speedwitch Media
645 Tanner Marsh Road, Guilford, CT 06437
info@speedwitch.com
www.speedwitch.com
(650) 787-1912

On Aug 27, 2005, at 1:54 PM, ed_mines wrote:

Anyone know anything about the Pittsburgh freight car book that was
supposed to be released at the NMRA convention?

Ed:

It's Harrisburg, not Pittsburgh. It was delayed for a few reasons, but it's nearing completion.

Regards,
Ted Culotta

Speedwitch Media
645 Tanner Marsh Road, Guilford, CT 06437
info@speedwitch.com
www.speedwitch.com
(650) 787-1912

Anyone know anything about the Pittsburgh freight car book that was
supposed to be released at the NMRA convention?

The Fowler box car Ed Hawkins' was going to produce?

Ed Mines

We are entering kind of a lull for obtaining freight car photos.

Some of the best sources from the past no longer offer prints - Will
Whittaker, Charles Winters, Frank Ellington ...... I think all are
still alive but old age has taken it's toll.

The inability to get traditional silver halide based photogrpahic
paper will probably shut down some of the other men who offer B&W
prints and it is unlikely that older men will spend $1000 on a new
type of photo processor.

I see a light in the tunnel though - as those new digital printers
get less expensive maybe the Smithsonian, Cal State RR museum, NMRA
library, Hagley museum and Ed Hawkins will get those printers and
start producing photos in house. I've gotten good freight car prints
from the first 3 organizations but their current prices are
unbeleiveably high.

I'm very glad builders photos of some cars are available - they are
the only ones I have of some cars I'd like to model. I'm glad too
that Erie had an official photographer who took a lot of "railroad
scenes" photos.

Ed Mines

Yo Al,

Is there any chance that you could scan a photo of these 1925 roller-bearing trucks and send it or post it to pictures? (Without the problem of another copyright infringement thread?)

Also, to paraphrase Bill Shakespeare, "A journal by any other name would smoke the same." I'm just a sleazy electrical-engineer. What do I know about the more mechanical-stuff too? Still learning!!

Paul Hillman

I'm just a chem major Tony, in other fields I'm lucky if my subjects &
verbs agree never mind correct usage of tecknickle terms. :-)

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

P.S. Oh, and right after hitting "send" on my previous post, I noticed
another picture of those inside-bearing roller-bearing trucks, this
time on a hopper. Same book, page facing the other pix. Also
installed '25.

I just wonder if there is a statistic available about the percentage of US freight cars that had roller-journals and solid or friction journals in 1960. Because, as a kid in the 50's & 60's I spent a lot of time around the railroads and RR yards and remember seeing the RR men opening the journal-covers and inspecting the bearings and "oiling" them, etc. To my remembrance there weren't many roller-journals on freight-cars. To me, then, they were still a "newish" device.

Back then we lived in Dolton, Illinois where 7 RR's crossed; the IC, IHB, NYC, PRR, B&OCT, C&EI & C&WI. I got to see a lot of different equipment. Wish I'd taken more photos, but I was only 15 & 16 yrs. old. Did a lot of mental-noting though.

One night in 1960, a friend of mine & I hopped a slow-moving IHB east-bound freight in Dolton. It was snowing and we got into an empty gondola. The train went further than I thought it would and we wound up at some junction and the train stopped. As we hid in the gon to escape detection, I still remember hearing the journal-inspectors opening and closing the journal-covers, hearing them "clank" back shut. Seemed like they did about the whole cut of cars as I recall. We were there quite awhile hearing their inspections before the train rolled again.

The train wound up going all the way to Inland Steel in Indiana and we wound up getting a ride back in the wood, kerosene-lanterned caboose. (Another story!)

Paul Hillman

Tim O'Connor writes about the Springfield show:

Bill we can't discuss it any further. You can talk about Cocoa Beach,
hotels, and bars, and even warm Florida weather, but please don't say
anything about ... you know what.

As a matter of fact, my messages of August 25 indicate rather clearly that subjects other than those included in the group's rules are out of scope. The rules:

"ALL SUBJECTS OTHER THAN THOSE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH STEAM ERA FREIGHT
CARS ARE PROHIBITED FROM MEMBER MESSAGES. Thus, all
admin, security, or "policing" functions will be conducted only by myself or
my representatives. Warnings about virus activity is strictly
prohibited. Threads or subjects may be terminated only by myself or my
representatives. When threads/subjects are terminated, members are expected
to avoid sending messages associated with such threads/subjects.

All references to politics or political views are prohibited.

Announcements of frt car related items for sell are permitted BUT actual
lists of items should be made available from the seller upon request rather
than in the message. Announcements of such sells should be kept at a
minimum. The primary objective of the group is to exchange information
concerning the subject.

Members must sign messages with their full names.

Announcements about prototype modeling events is within scope."

Thus, other than announcements...dates, cost, location [ including the facility ], and planned activities...about Prototype Rails at Cocoa Beach, Naperville, St. Louis and various other RPM meets...is out of scope. Since the hotel at which the Cocoa Beach meet is held experienced severe hurricane damage last yr, an update on its condition was certainly warranted. Descriptions of weather around the country including FL can be interesting...even curious...but comments about it are not within scope. Out of scope messages are not uncommon and even expected. Continuing to present out of scope messages, however, when the subject has been declared ended will invoke a response from management.

I'm reminded of the time I was standing next to a policeman near a wedding reception that just ended. Some people came out, jumped in a car and scratched off. Cop just stood there. Then another did it. Then another. Finally, after the 5th one or so, the cop said..."That's it!" jumped in his car, turned on the siren and sped after them. Two warrants were issued this morning and more will follow until we get this group back to frt cars.

Mike Brock
STMFC Owner