Date   

Re: Seaboard steam era stock cars/Pratt truss stock cars

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Ed Mines wrote:
Did any railroads have Pratt trussed stock cars besides PM or the old
Ulrich model?
The Harriman stock cars of UP and SP were Pratt trussed, and Red Caboose is about to release them in HO scale.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

ed_mines wrote:
How about double door box cars? 1 in 9 of all box cars sound right?

50 ft. cars? I'm not sure at all but in 1946 this would be a very
small number, maybe 2 or 3%.
For a number of years around the time you specify, Ed, the national percentage of auto cars was about 8%. Auto cars were then defined as having double doors and some other characteristics, and were definitely dominated by 50-foot cars by 1946. I don't have an ORER in front of me, but of that 8% I might guess 6% 50-ft., balance 40-ft., and many of both types would be single-sheathed.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

I know I should not comment on this but what the heck. You guys have all the fun while I research viruses.

There are certain subjects that seem to come up for discussion every few months. Hence, like lengthy debates about color, we once again see another discussion about frt car...or box car...populations on our model RR's. These discussions are entirely within scope and, I suppose, the only problem with them might be that they might be copied and used by some enlightened entrepreneur as a non drug response to insomnia. I do think, however, that we should at least attempt to clarify certain points...at the risk of immediately putting some members into an unexpected coma. Thus:

Bruce Smith writes:

"Here we go again... That's a falsehood perpetrated by model
railroaders. The facts seem to show pretty clearly that with a very
few special exceptions regionality (location) and connecting
railroads have NOTHING to do with populations of boxcars. Connecting
railroads may affect specific train makes-up (like Mike's favorite
example the espee forwarder) but those are usually "balanced
translocations", as we geneticists call them."

Weeelll...here's what we know from the tiny bit of data we have from the two Wyoming Fraley's which have been analyzed...mine and Tim Gilbert's. The following analysis was presented to the STMFC last Feb and March:

"The number of total cars to SP box cars in my report is 20.4 while 57.6 in
Tim's...4.9% in mine to 1.7% in Tim's. The number of SP box cars...136...is
9.89% of the total number of box cars. There were 233 UP box cars. The
number of SP box cars to foreign road box cars is 11.9%.

My Fraley shows the consists of 34 frt trains traveling between Rawlins and
Laramie, WY in 1949. Those trains include 2 WP box cars...#14334 and #40026.
The same trains show 53 definite C&NW box cars [ Tim Gilbert identified
55 ]. The C&NW % of the national fleet is about 2.79%. WP's % is 0.30%.
There are 1464 box cars in my Fraley. C&NW's 2.79% predicts 41 C&NW box
cars, 4.4 WP box cars. The error for C&NW is +14 cars...3.75% or an error of
about 34%. The 2 WP cars equates to 1.3%...an error of about 50%. The % of
the national fleet for SP [ not T&NO ] is 3.1%. This predicts 46 SP box
cars. The actual number is 136...or an error of 90 cars...about a 200%
error. The national % for CB&Q is 2.57% which predicts 38 cars. The actual
number is 75 producing an error of about 100%.

Thus, we find some RRs with major connections to the UP's Wyoming/Nebraska
trunk line to have a significantly higher number of box cars present in UP
trains than that of the national fleet. These include C&NW, SP, and CB&Q.
OTOH, WP has a significantly lower number. While C&NW and SP are direct
connections to significant markets from the Wyoming/Nebraska trunk line [
central California and the midwest through Chicago ], neither the WP or Q
appears to perform such a connection. The Q did have significant
interchanges with UP in the Nebraska, eastern Wyoming and Colorado areas."

It seems clear from the 1949 Fraley data that box car populations of SP, C&NW, and CB&Q on the UP between Laramie and Green River, WY do not follow the national percentages during the spring of 1949. Period. We can speculate why this might be true but, IMO, that is nothing but theory and it doesn't really matter anyhow if one is modeling the spring of 1949. For this priod, the population of frt cars on the UP between Laramie and Green River is available...for 34 frt trains.

Other information, such as the video of the infamous UP train with 36+ SP box cars shot in 1953 apparently near Buford, WY, and 4 or 5 additional train footage shot during '53 confirms that large numbers of SP box cars were accumulated in certain UP frt trains. Why this was so is again open to speculation and theory but if one is modeling the area and time the reason is not relevent. Such theory is, of course, relevent if one is trying to draw conclusions in order to project populations in other areas or at different periods of time. Unfortunately, IMO, such conclusions are simply theory and the supporting data are not available. IOW, we don't have any data...that I'm aware of...regarding the CB&Q in Nebraska, the Mopac and Frisco from St. Louis to KC, ATSF from Chicago to LA etc. Knowing that the actual numbers in the Laramie/Green River area are so much in error from the national percentage prediction, how can one rely on such a theory to project a population on the ATSF or SP in Arizona? Or even the L&N between Knoxville and Cincinnati?

The Tim Gilbert/Dave Nelson theory that box car populations match...within some "ball park"...the national percentage appears to be a "long term" evaluation...say for a year. And, BTW, it is an interesting and useful theory...definitely bringing light to an area filled with erroneous conclusions from the past...as Bruce notes. Anyhow, if one had frt conductor books for an entire yr and IF the data showed a close match to the national percentage, the modeler would still be left with the problem that he/she doesn't model for the entire yr...unless they change the scenery about 4 times during the process. Yes...Wyoming scenery...think of the poor guy doing any place north of south Ga...does change between Jan and June. IOW, even if the population of a particular RR matched the national percentage...and we don't know that it does...for a yr, it won't necessarily in the shorter term.

So...what is one to do? Simple as can be. Don't sweat it. Acquire more cars of the RRs with larger fleets, more cars of the RR you model, and one or two cars of RRs with smaller fleets and move on. In fact, one could simply use the national percentage. I mean...it's as good as any way to acquire more cars of RRs with larger fleets, few cars of RRs with smaller fleets. That will give you time to consider various responses to the Prototype Police as to why you...modeling, say, the GN in Montana have a Seaboard hopper car or, you, Armand, have an SP GS gon up in Vermont. The answer, BTW, is also simple. Just shrug your shoulders and say..."I have no clue...it just showed up". If the Prototype Police begin writing a ticket...quickly produce your photo of the UP train in Wahsatch, UT [ The Streamliner, Vol 18 no 2, pg 17 ] with the 2 Mopac hoppers and 2 Rock Island GS gons ]. I don't, however, suggest running 2 SP GS gons, Armand. Don't want to push the issue you know.<G>.

Anyone still awake?

Mike Brock


Re: New Graphic Site

Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Schuyler, I think this message is the product of a viral infection. Check
the "To Address". I'm getting a handful of them each day.

Dave Nelson

_____

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
Schuyler Larrabee
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:35 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] New Graphic Site



COPY the message and PASTE it into a new one to the list.

SGL

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups. <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> com
[mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups. <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> com] On
Behalf Of Bill Middlemas
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:46 AM
To: -lesbianpicsnperson <mailto:-lesbianpicsnpersons%40yahoogroups.com>
s@...
Subject: [STMFC] New Graphic Site



Note: forwarded message attached.







Resinator's Flash for IC modelers and connecting railroads

lnbill <bwelch@...>
 

I received in the mail yesterday test shots of a fall release from
Sunshine. The model in question is the standard Illinois Central two
bay offset twin hopper. It is amazing to me how far resin casters have
been able to push the technology. There is detail on the inside and the
inside also replicates the offset design. The two major pieces are the
hopper bays and the body, which is a one-piece casting.

I will be researching to see if I can use the castings to create a
similar car owned by the NC&StL built by Pullman in 1929.

This will stack very nicely next to a Kadee example in terms of detail.

Bill Welch


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

ed_mines
 

--- In STMFC@..., Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...> wrote:

Below in roughly five year increments are US Class I Boxcars owned
as
per the material of their underframe and sheathing. Cars listed in
the
Steel Underframe column could be single or double sheathed (wood)
while
most of those in the "Other" column had Wood or Composite (Steel
Center
Sills) Underframes (most had truss rods), but could be assumed had
wood
single or double sheathing. All-Steel means a SUF with Steel
Sheathing.

Total Steel SUF Other
Year 000's % Tot 000's % 000's %
000's %
1921 1,038 100.0% 29 3.2% 533 51.4% 471
45.4%
1925 1,078 100.0% 68 6.3% 664 61.6% 345
32.0%
1930 1,060 100.0% 125 11.8% 735 69.4% 200
18.8%
1935 809 100.0% 146 18.0% 584 72.2% 79
9.8%
1940 705 100.0% 268 37.9% 394 55.8% 44
6.2%
1945 742 100.0% 386 52.1% 329 44.5% 26
3.5%
1950 715 100.0% 507 70.8% 203 28.5% 5
0.7%
1954 720 100.0% 589 81.8% 129 18.0% 1
0.2%

I'm interested in 1946 (when locomotives were steam) - the %s I use
are typical steel box car (4/5 & 5/5 Drednaught ends with
rectangular panel roof) - 20%, single sheathed - 25%, double
sheathed 15% all other steel (including X29 sized cars, round roof
cars, rebuilds.....) - 40%. Truss rod box cars (included as SS and
DS) - 3%. I'm in pretty close agreement with Tim's data presented
above.

What about Pratt trussed box cars? Does 1 in 9 single sheathed cars
sound right?

How about double door box cars? 1 in 9 of all box cars sound right?

50 ft. cars? I'm not sure at all but in 1946 this would be a very
small number, maybe 2 or 3%.

What do you guys think?

Ed


Re: Digest Number 3180

Russ Strodtz <sheridan@...>
 

Tim,

You lost me somewhere. Why does boxcar distribution
have "considerably less variables" than other car
types?

While it is correct to view a road's boxcar roster as
a contribution to a National Pool geography also paid
a part in what was where. Most roads did not have a
lot of interest in following SCO 90 guidelines so cars
without any logical home route would be used over and
over again. One example is the rather heavy usage of
T&NO and TP box cars in the Chicago Area in the late
50's and early 60's.

Yes, I do realize that there is some kind of map in the
back of ORER's that talks about loading to various
geographic zones but that information was not binding
on any Railroad Employee that was actually doing car
distribution. I followed the instructions issued by my
Employer. So did everyone else.

Russ
1f. Re: #'s/%'s of important box car types
Posted by: "Tim Gilbert" tgilbert@... timgilbert17851
Date: Mon Jun 12, 2006 4:53 pm (PDT)

Peter,

The Title of this thread includes the words "BOX CAR!" With the
exception of the grain case, the car types of your examples do not
include boxcars. Boxcar distribution had considerably less variables
than hoppers, gons, stock cars, etc.. Stick to the subject!

If you go to Ian Wilson's web site, he has a whole bunch of US Boxcars
on a spreadsheet - the distribution of ownership among those US Boxcars
is roughly proportional to the percentage the car owner owned of the US
National Fleet.

I know of no way to distinguish the percent of CN boxcars versus the CP
percentage in either Canada or in the US although I believe the
Dominion's Bureau of Statistics does differentiate between the US and
Canadian Foreign Cars on Line although I don't believe there is any
split of how many Canadian foreign boxcars on line and how many US
Boxcars were on a Canadian Line.

Yes, I agree with you that "a representative traffic mix is the result
of good research not taking average numbers from car fleets" providing
that the information is available which frequently it is not. Boxcars,
however, require less "good research" than other car types because of
that type's operating characteristics.

Tim Gilbert


Re: Seaboard steam era stock cars/Pratt truss stock cars

Andy Carlson
 

It was late into our covered era (1958), but Great Northern converted Pratt trussed 40' boxcars into stockcars which were distinctive in their reuse of Youngstown doors after cutting oval slots for ventillation.
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...> wrote: Ed Mines asked:

Anyone see a photo or drawing of one of these rare cars? What do they
look like?

The dimensions in the equipment registers are near identical to the
classic single sheathed Pratt truss SAL box cars.

Did any railroads have Pratt trussed stock cars besides PM or the old
Ulrich model?

In 1944, the B&M converted 15 of its #72000 series Pratt Truss boxcars
constructed in 1930 to be stock cars. These stockcars were renumbered
into the #57500-57514 series, and were reconverted back to boxcars in
1955-56.

The extent of the 1944 conversion was to replace the solid wood
sheathing on the side with slats so the livestock could get a breath of
"fresh air." The #27500 series' trucks, steel side trusses, ends, roofs,
and underframe were the same as they were before the conversion.

Tim Gilbert





Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Seaboard steam era stock cars/Pratt truss stock cars

lnbill <bwelch@...>
 

The PRR had Pratt trussed cars and the L&N had copies.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@..., "ed_mines" <ed_mines@...> wrote:

Anyone see a photo or drawing of one of these rare cars? What do they
look like?

The dimensions in the equipment registers are near identical to the
classic single sheathed Pratt truss SAL box cars.

Did any railroads have Pratt trussed stock cars besides PM or the old
Ulrich model?


Ed


Re: Seaboard steam era stock cars/Pratt truss stock cars

Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Ed Mines asked:

Anyone see a photo or drawing of one of these rare cars? What do they
look like?

The dimensions in the equipment registers are near identical to the
classic single sheathed Pratt truss SAL box cars.

Did any railroads have Pratt trussed stock cars besides PM or the old
Ulrich model?

In 1944, the B&M converted 15 of its #72000 series Pratt Truss boxcars constructed in 1930 to be stock cars. These stockcars were renumbered into the #57500-57514 series, and were reconverted back to boxcars in 1955-56.

The extent of the 1944 conversion was to replace the solid wood sheathing on the side with slats so the livestock could get a breath of "fresh air." The #27500 series' trucks, steel side trusses, ends, roofs, and underframe were the same as they were before the conversion.

Tim Gilbert


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Gatwood, Elden J SAD <Elden.J.Gatwood@...>
 

Tim;

607,000 boxcars seems an awfully low total for Boxcars - at least
through 1960.

That figure (606,634) is for Jan 1964, a point I have good date for (does not
include Canadian); but it is sacrilege to talk of that late date on this
list. The early 60's seem to be a real low point in many regards. PRR went
from ~150k in 1960 to about 116k in 1965. I am sure they were scrapping X29s
and H21As like mad.

What is missing from your totals are the Boxcars built to the 1923
Design dimension (8' 7" IH) including the X29; wood sheathed cars either
single or double sheathed which still comprised about 18% of the US
Class I Boxcar fleet on 12/31/1954 - down from 29% in 1950, 48% in 1945
& 62% in 1940; proprietary boxcars designs developed by individual RR's
like the PRR X31's. This last category might include rebuilds, too.

I would love to see that data, but by year, or at least every five years from
1940 to 1965. That would be a very interesting thesis.

The X29 for my timeframe would be overrepresented, given my modeling of the
PRR, and in my area, which attracted more than its share of old ugly
equipment. Nevertheless, X29's in my time, on a fleet basis, would have only
been 0.35% of the national box car fleet. Obviously those modeling earlier
timeframes would have much greater percentages of X29's by a long shot.

So please be more specific about the date of your survey. Also, you used
many sources - what were they?

Jan 1964; ORER, plus data put together by Jim Eager, Ed Hawkins, Ted Culotta,
and others, available on the Steam Freight Cars site, as well as from them.
It is just car type totals one would use; the total of box cars, and indeed
the expectation that there was little attrition, is based on statements made
by all you folks over the years.

Clearly the attrition of SS and DS cars would be a large factor in my
timeframe. I have been told that only ~1% of all box cars were wood
sheathed, by my era. The only wood sheathed cars I actually remember in
interchange were roads like NP, GN, and a couple southern roads, in addition
to one X26 and one B&O SS car I remember seeing. Care to comment?

Additionally, the retirement of X29s and NYC cars was growing very large in
the late 50's, and by 1964, few NYC cars, and only some 2125 X29s (down from
~28,000?), were still around, despite there being about 6400 X31As still on
the rails. There were also on 3 X26's, but 2624 X26C and 716 X26F rebuilds
and 2125 X29's, but 4,344 X29B's, 4,016 X29D's, and over a thousand other X29
rebuilds. Interesting.

Take care,

Elden


Dalman HO trucks are both back in stock

Andy Carlson
 

I have good quantities of the HO bulk Dalman 2 level trucks produced by Tahoe Model Works back into stock. I am shipping both Plain and Lateral motion versions for $2.50 pair, less wheelsets. Please contact me at >midcentury@...> off-list if interested. Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Gatwood, Elden J SAD <Elden.J.Gatwood@...>
 

All;

Although I hadn't intended that this discussion go down this road, I will
make the following observations based on a lot of recent analysis of trains
and photos in my area, the PRR in other areas, and those of other roads' yard
shots, looking at roads, car types, loads, and specific cars. Obviously, the
general statement of the number of different car types is only useful in a
specific context if one were to know if one's area of interest was
representative of the national fleet, or vice versa.

.... often, the loading road did not have a choice because there
were no home road boxcars available for loading.

This appears to be true in my area of interest, too.

Car Service Rules to route loaded cars either towards their home road
were frequently ignored either by the shipper or by the originating road
(or both).

That also appears to be true, as ones sees cars that should be going back
home going the opposite direction, and cars being "diverted" based on local
need.

... a higher percentage of newer designs would be off road than those of the
older designs. Some of this may be due to the repair of boxcars - also, more
of the older boxcars might have been kept in a home road's strategic
reserve. This is an observation of mine, and cannot be proven with any
parsing that I have done.

Tim, that is a very interesting, and important statement you made, which I
also believe to be true. My area of interest shows a greater percentage of
older cars than the overall fleet (a far greater percentage of X29s, X31As,
and older gondolas, than X50s, X51s, X55s, X58s, X59s and X60s). I suspect
that the industries represented got more than their share of older, crummy
cars, than the newer ones. I would also suspect that if one were modeling
something high value, like the auto industry, one would see a far greater
percentage of new cars, and dedicated car types and classes.

I also have a greater presence of PRR and foreign 50' box cars, due to Fisher
Body service and lumber service, respectively, than the proportion expected
for 40' boxes, for example, and higher percentages of gondolas and hoppers
than one would expect, due to the large presence of the steel and coal mining
industries. It is just part of that area specificity that one would expect.

There also seems to be an odd overabundance of certain roads' cars on the
PRR, and underabundance of others. I suspect this was due to the PRR's
relationship and connections with certain roads like the CB&Q, who is very
over represented, for example.

I would also love to see the breakdowns various folks have derived for their
fleets!

Elden Gatwood


Re: Dreadnaught Ends Question

al_brown03
 

There's a picture of MILW 272015 in Maywald's "Classic Freight Cars
vol 8" (p 40), with end doors. This picture post-dates replacement
of the wood siding with steel.

Anyone know how common it was to retrofit cars with end doors? The
retrofit would include adding that heavy frame around the end doors.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


--- In STMFC@..., "buchwaldfam" <duff@...> wrote:

It's 272000 - 272303, built as 271500 - 271999 in 1929. There's a
good
photo of 271693 in the July 1996 Railmodel Journal, but the caption
states that, "Neither had end doors, but the 1929 cars had small
lumber doors in their A ends". The caption also states that the
cars
had 3/3/3 dreadnaught ends. My question is because the earlier 40'
cars already had 4/5 ends.
Also interesting, the equipment drawing states, "END DOOR DWG-AS
WING CAR A-3968", and the illustration shows an end door. Also
stated,
"STEEL END_ _ _ _ UNION MET. PROD. CO."
There is a note that states that the car was converted as a wing
car
in 1944, and roof lowered in 1946. Would they have installed end
doors
and then gone to the trouble of removing them from such an old
car?

Thanks,
Phil Buchwald

--- In STMFC@..., "al_brown03" <abrown@> wrote:

What number series is the car you're building?

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


--- In STMFC@..., "buchwaldfam" <duff@> wrote:

Is there a specific cutoff date (month, year??) when
Dreadnaught
ends went from 3/3/3 to 4/5 (three panel to two)? Something
similar
to when Murphy roof panels went from rectangular to diagonal
in
1948?
I'm woring on a MILW 50' box car which was built in 1929.
Similar
cars built two years earlier had 3/3/3 ends, but the equipment
diagram
doesn't mention the style on the 1929 car. 1928 built 40' cars
had
4/5
ends, so my guess is that the 1929 cars did also....

Thanks!
Phil Buchwald


Re: ADMIN: Yahoo Worm Problem

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

List,
As Mike has noted below, this is the real thing according to Snopes:
Urban Legends. So be forewarned and ready to deal with it! I found
three suspicious emails with New Graphic Site in the subject line.
Fortunately, I am not a Yahoo subscriber and the University of Delaware
has a way to access your email with out going through the home browser.
It is called "WebMail" and is accessed through the net itself. I was
able to delete these directly on the UD server with out opening them.

Tom Olsen
7 Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@...


Here is the web page from Snopes:


New Graphic Site


Virus: New Graphic Site (aka JS.Yamanner@m)

Status: Real.

Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006]

There is an email going around with the subject "New Graphics Site". It
is spreading fast as about 100 people I know have gotten it just today.
If you get an email with that in the subject line delete it quickly and
DO NOT OPEN IT! This is a new virus I have been told.



Mike Brock wrote:

As most of you probably know, Yahoo has a problem which is allowing a worm
to send messages out to various Yahoo Groups. The following is a quote from
the website "The Register":

A JavaScript worm that takes advantage of an unpatched vulnerability in
Yahoo!'s webmail service has been discovered on the net.

The JS-Yamanner worm spreads when a Windows user accesses Yahoo! Mail to
open an email sent by the worm. The attack works because of a vulnerability
in Yahoo! Mail that enables scripts embedded within HTML emails to be run
within a user's browser instead of being blocked.

Once executed, the worm forwards itself to an infected users' contacts on
Yahoo! Mail. It also harvests these address and sends them to a remote
internet server. Only contacts with an email address of either @yahoo.com or
@yahoogroups.com are hit by this behaviour.

Infected emails commonly have the subject line "New Graphic Site" and are
spoofed so as to appear from "av3@...". Users who open infected emails
will be redirected to a webpage at www.av3.net/index.htm.

Symantec Security Response senior manager Kevin Hogan said: "Unlike its
predecessors, which would require the user to open an attachment in order to
launch and propagate, JS-Yamanner makes use of a security hole in the Yahoo!
web mail program in order to spread to other Yahoo! users. Yahoo! is a
popular email tool, and although normally closed to such threats, the
exploitation of this vulnerability provides access to a significant number
of internet users.

"As there is no patch at present, users are recommended to update virus
definitions and firewall signatures and to block any emails sent from
av3@...." ®"

At this time I have placed those members whose address appears to be
associated with the messages in moderation. I should emphasize that these
members have committed no wrong and they will be unmoderated when Yahoo
fixes their problem. I suggest that all members institute a message rule
which will automatically delete messages with "New Graphic Site" in the
subject line. Unfortunately, Yahoo apparently has no feature which would
allow me to identify such messages at the Yahoogroups site. Since I am not
entirely clear as to the process being used by this worm, that is the
current extent of my actions. Further moves may be required.

Mike Brock

STMFC Owner


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


ADMIN: Yahoo Worm Problem

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

As most of you probably know, Yahoo has a problem which is allowing a worm
to send messages out to various Yahoo Groups. The following is a quote from
the website "The Register":

A JavaScript worm that takes advantage of an unpatched vulnerability in
Yahoo!'s webmail service has been discovered on the net.

The JS-Yamanner worm spreads when a Windows user accesses Yahoo! Mail to
open an email sent by the worm. The attack works because of a vulnerability
in Yahoo! Mail that enables scripts embedded within HTML emails to be run
within a user's browser instead of being blocked.

Once executed, the worm forwards itself to an infected users' contacts on
Yahoo! Mail. It also harvests these address and sends them to a remote
internet server. Only contacts with an email address of either @yahoo.com or
@yahoogroups.com are hit by this behaviour.

Infected emails commonly have the subject line "New Graphic Site" and are
spoofed so as to appear from "av3@...". Users who open infected emails
will be redirected to a webpage at www.av3.net/index.htm.

Symantec Security Response senior manager Kevin Hogan said: "Unlike its
predecessors, which would require the user to open an attachment in order to
launch and propagate, JS-Yamanner makes use of a security hole in the Yahoo!
web mail program in order to spread to other Yahoo! users. Yahoo! is a
popular email tool, and although normally closed to such threats, the
exploitation of this vulnerability provides access to a significant number
of internet users.

"As there is no patch at present, users are recommended to update virus
definitions and firewall signatures and to block any emails sent from
av3@...." ®"

At this time I have placed those members whose address appears to be
associated with the messages in moderation. I should emphasize that these
members have committed no wrong and they will be unmoderated when Yahoo
fixes their problem. I suggest that all members institute a message rule
which will automatically delete messages with "New Graphic Site" in the
subject line. Unfortunately, Yahoo apparently has no feature which would
allow me to identify such messages at the Yahoogroups site. Since I am not
entirely clear as to the process being used by this worm, that is the
current extent of my actions. Further moves may be required.

Mike Brock

STMFC Owner


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Bruce Smith
 

On Mon, June 12, 2006 6:56 pm, armand wrote:
Bruce ,when you have examined as many switchlists as I have you might
think differently.Review my statement if you will.I am prepared to
document
my statement for the road I model.
Please do. I would love to see the numbers that you have.

National statistics do not apply for the
short period we model.We are not talking about real railroads, but model
railroads.There is no way we could have 10,000 box cars.There are not many
modelers who own three hundred cars.If we were to apply national averages
to our own railroads the mix would be different if we modeled a west coast
road as opposed to a deep south or midwest railroad.
I'm planning on 500 freight cars. I've designed a fleet of approximately
150 boxcars that fairly closely mimics the national averages for road
names (with the exception of the home road PRR, which is higher of
course). In many cases, such as with the B&O and NYC, I have been able to
look at their fleet numbers and design the components so that they not
only agree with the national average for that road, but are subdivided
correctly with respect to car types within a given fleet. The fun thing
about that is that it shows you things like the percentage of B&O
wagontops was really pretty low - two will do it for me. But I need a
number of other B&O boxcars.

There is no question that I
own more NYC and PRR cars than UP or SP because that is what the
switchlists
show over a several year period.
Um, that's not a great example, since as Tim pointed out, that's in
agreement with the national average <G>. In addition, you may not have
fully considered the bias of switch lists which do not represent the
population on-line but rather the population being switched by the local
or yard crews. While a switch list might be accurate for the terminus of
a branch line served only by that local, the switch lists for Columbia PA
would be a gross misrepresentation of the cars that passed that point on
the PRR and Reading.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn AL


Re: New Graphic Site

Schuyler Larrabee
 

COPY the message and PASTE it into a new one to the list.

SGL

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On
Behalf Of Bill Middlemas
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:46 AM
To: -lesbianpicsnpersons@...
Subject: [STMFC] New Graphic Site



Note: forwarded message attached.







Re: C&O Box cars

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Thanks very . . .

SGL

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On
Behalf Of al_brown03
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 3:21 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: C&O Box cars

Several sources list this series as C&O 14000-14989, built
6/1945, so C&O 14704 and 14955 would be almost identical cars
(their trucks were different). Pat Wider's article in RP CYC
8 shows (p 82) a builder's photo of C&O 14111; the original
paint scheme differs from the one you show (same photo
appears in MRG 3-4/95, p 50).

In RMJ 6/93, p 15, is a yard photo dated 8/50, which shows a
car from this series in what looks like the as-built paint scheme.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

--- In STMFC@... <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
, "Schuyler Larrabee"
<schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg
<http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg>

That's a photo of a C&O box car.

Would 14704 be a car like this one? Fallen Flags doesn't have a
C&O car diagram book or a listing
of car series. And would it have looked like this in 1954?

SGL




Murphy roofs (Was: ATSF BX9 roof/C)

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Ted Culotta wrote:
Murphy radial roof, although all MP radial roofs were not Murphy. Some were Standard Railway Equipment Co. radial, too.
Did anyone besides SRECo market something called a "Murphy roof"? I don't find them in the Cycs I have, but my set is far from complete.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history

140321 - 140340 of 195458