Date   

Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dave Nelson wrote:
For real trains yes, but for model railroads something else comes into play.
See, when reduced by whatever factor is necessary to get down to model RR
length trains of 10-20 cars, every foreign road name, save those 4 or 5
largest roads, will have an expected sighting of less than 1. Yet obviously
the ordinary train will have foreign road boxcars -- and not just for the
4-5 largest road names. You simply have to compose the indicidual consist
of each train according to some other guideline, one probably greatly
influenced by location. This is why is I always try to include the phrasing
"roster of boxcars" and avoid "consists". They're two wholly different
concepts and I have little to add about the later... other than to say swap
cars in and out of storage and take advantage of all those road names when 1
car, now and then, will add to variety.
Well said. I think this sums it up for me too.

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@...>
 

Tim Gilbert wrote:
Both Dave & I have found that there is a correlation between the distribution of ownership of boxcars of those in each of the wheel reports and the percentage that the boxcar owner owned of the national boxcar fleet. Sometimes that correlation is good - and sometimes not so good.
Exactly.

Thus, the rule of thumb which infers in the absence of any other data to the contrary, the distribution of ownership among all the boxcars on a model railroad should roughly parallel the percentage that the owner owned of the national boxcar fleet.
This is clear and I hope not disputed by anyone: subject of course to "IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY OTHER DATA," as stated.

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

Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Tony Thompson wrote:

Dave Nelson wrote:
Most conductor's logs will contain more than 25 trains. Tim and I have
looked at several thousand boxcar entries from hundreds of trains.
They
give a clear and unambigous body of data that shows those railroads
with the
most boxcars (e.g., PRR, NYC) have their cars recorded most often and
those
with the least, least often, with everybody else in between, generally
falling in line by the size of their boxcar fleet.
I am convinced by these data for the overall national behavior.
But if anything, these combined data will OBSCURE local differences
with particular trains. Tim O'Connor has made this point: the modeler
wonders if a PARTICULAR train exhibits the overall averages.
Statistically and in common sense, the answer must be NO. To some
extent, that's what Mike Brock is saying.
You can't have it both ways: the bigger the sample, the less
information about particular trains. That solves some problems, sure,
but obscures others.
Tony,

I agree with you in terms of a "fixed" consist in a specific freight train a la the "California Zephyr." Mike Brock seems to have been trying to "California Zephyrize" his freight trains which infers running the same consist every time he operates his railroad. Freight train consists in specific trains, however, in the real world were different every day.

The freight car data which Dave Nelson & I have parsed from wheel reports and other car reports will not solve Mike Brock's "California Zephyr" problems. All they represent is a pool of cars which were reported by a railroad over a course of time.

The boxcar pools of each report are the subject of this thread. Both Dave & I have found that there is a correlation between the distribution of ownership of boxcars of those in each of the wheel reports and the percentage that the boxcar owner owned of the national boxcar fleet. Sometimes that correlation is good - and sometimes not so good.

Thus, the rule of thumb which infers in the absence of any other data to the contrary, the distribution of ownership among all the boxcars on a model railroad should roughly parallel the percentage that the owner owned of the national boxcar fleet. The Boxcars chosen would represent the pool of boxcars which individual trains haul. There is an element of selective compression in freight cars, too. There is no way to have all 700,000 plus boxcars on any layout.

Some of the smaller roads may not be represented on a layout limited to 100 boxcars. In 1947, roughly 84% of the national boxcar fleet was owned by some 28 RR's having more than 1% of the national boxcar fleet. How to allocate the remaining 16% among the 100-odd other RR's can become a problem.

If the model is designed to make pick-ups and drops, the consists of the freight trains should change each operating session. If there are no pick ups or drops on the model RR, then a bit of 0-5-0 switching will have to be done in staging. That does not mean that the percentages should be locked in, but adjustments should be made when better information becomes available.

For instance, both Dave & I have found that the total number of home road boxcars reported in a wheel report exceed by quite a bit the percentage of home road boxcars of the total US boxcar fleet. Canadian boxcars in the US are tough to get a handle on because of the Custom restrictions to their free movement in getting reloads when they are empty. OK, in these cases, home road & Canadian boxcars should be removed from the equation and "dealt by hand."

Sometimes, one or a group of roads owned much more boxcars in a report than their percentage of the national boxcar fleet. Mike Brock found that the number of SP Pacific Line boxcars were such a case in the Spring 1949 UP Conductor Fraley's Wheel Report between Laramie & Rawlins WY. No such aberration showed up in Fraley's Fall 1947 Wheel Report where the number of SP - Pacific Lines boxcars exceeded their percentage of the national boxcar fleet only slightly. I attempted to answer this in my comparative analysis of the two wheel reports in the STMFC message #51085 of 2/3/2006.

The answer of why could be focused around the question "How did the SP supply empty cars for lumber loading?" In the Fall of 1947, there was a shortage of boxcars caused by a severe boxcar shortage caused, in part, by the effect of the Grain Rush "back east" as well as a booming economy. In the Spring of 1949, there was no Grain Rush plus the Economy was in Recession. This downturn allowed the SP (& UP) to stockpile its own boxcars for lumber loading, and send home many empty foreign boxcars from Southern California home across Sherman Hill instead of diverting them to Northern California or the Pacific Northwest for lumber loading.

Which was "more normal" - Fraley's Fall 1947 or his Spring 1949 Report? Mike has chosen May 1954 as the date of his layout - 1954 being another Recession year. If I was Mike, I would give precedence to the Fall 1949 Report. If the date was the Fall of 1955 or 1956, I would give precedence to the Fall 1947 Report.

Tim Gilbert


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Tony Writes:

I am convinced by these data for the overall national behavior.
But if anything, these combined data will OBSCURE local differences
with particular trains.
===================================
For real trains yes, but for model railroads something else comes into play.
See, when reduced by whatever factor is necessary to get down to model RR
length trains of 10-20 cars, every foreign road name, save those 4 or 5
largest roads, will have an expected sighting of less than 1. Yet obviously
the ordinary train will have foreign road boxcars -- and not just for the
4-5 largest road names. You simply have to compose the indicidual consist
of each train according to some other guideline, one probably greatly
influenced by location. This is why is I always try to include the phrasing
"roster of boxcars" and avoid "consists". They're two wholly different
concepts and I have little to add about the later... other than to say swap
cars in and out of storage and take advantage of all those road names when 1
car, now and then, will add to variety.

Dave Nelson


Re: Dalman HO trucks are both back in stock

Andy Carlson
 

These trucks are cast in some form of engineering plastic (Delrin?) They are engineered to take the standard width Intermountain Wheelsets, which are available in both semi-Scale (code 88) and Fat wheel (code 110). Currently the trucks are available only as bulk sideframes (One Piece) with the brake gear factory applied (snapped in). These brake beams are very similar to the Kadee parts, and feature brake shoes aligned with the wheel treads.

In coming weeks (months?) these trucks will become available with factory packaging and with Intermountain metal wheelsets installed. Both Fat and Semi-Scale wheels will be available.

These trucks have been made with an attempt to maintain "Standard" bolster height to lessen the need for shimming and other modifications.

Taho Model Works is already at work on the next truck, and downstream some really needed trucks will be produced. We are so fortunate to have work of this caliber presented to us modelers.
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA
-Andy Carlson

On Jun 13, 2006, at 1:56 PM, buchwaldfam wrote:

Also, are these trucks styrene, Acetal, or metal?


Re: Dalman HO trucks are both back in stock

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Jun 13, 2006, at 1:56 PM, buchwaldfam wrote:

Could you describe the differences between the plain and lateral
motion styles please?
Aside from the Andrews truck features, which class would the Soo
Line truck which Dennis Storzek posted last week fall into?
Also, are these trucks styrene, Acetal, or metal?
The two types were essentially the same except for the presence or
absence of Barber Lateral Motion devices between the bolsters and
spring groups. The Soo Line Dalman-Andrews truck in the image posted
by Dennis last week had Barber later motion devices, and that image
well illustrates their appearance. The Dalman-Andrews trucks used by
the Great Northern and Seaboard Air Line did not have lateral motion
bolsters.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Digest Number 3180

Chet French <cfrench@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Russ Strodtz" <sheridan@...> wrote:

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. <snip>

Russ,

In going through switch lists of the Wabash at Forrest, IL, during
1954 and 1955, I also noticed large numbers of T&NO and T&P cars.
The Wabash handled these empty cars from Chicago to Forrest and
interchanged them to the TP&W, destined for Peoria, Il, in care of
the TPW agent at that location. Some of the cars were captured by
the Wabash at Forrest for loading on the Streator branch.

I did a study of how many foreign road house cars were on all the
switch lists for March 1955 and it totaled 873 cars representing 75
railroads. The top ten were;
ATSF - 99
T&NO - 60
NYC - 48
PRR - 45
CB&Q - 42
IC - 35
SP - 30
UP - 28
MILW - 27
GN - 25

The T&P was 13th with 23 cars. The Wabash interchanged with the
Santa Fe at Streator and that accounts for the high number of ATSF
cars. Many of the ATSF cars were inbound loads for the Smith-
Douglass fertilizer plant at Streator, being loaded toward home, as
they should. The Wabash also interchanged with the CB&Q at Streator.

The complete list of railroads and number of car for each is
somewhere on this site. Don't remember the message number.

Chet French
Dixon, IL


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

al_brown03
 

SAL's class S-1 stock cars, numbered 7900-7949 then 6900-6949 then
3020-3054 (50 cars, two renumberings), were rebuilt from class B-3
Pratt truss boxcars, hence the dimensional similarity. :-) There's a
photo of SAL 3043 in Lines South 4th/04, p 26, accompanying John
Golden's article on SAL's composite boxcars and rebuilds from them.
SAL 3033, shown on the back cover of the same issue, was an oddball
rebuilt from a B-*5* box.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.



--- 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


Walthers Gon with Bulk Containers

John Thompson
 

I'm just a part-time lurker on this list, so I apologize if you've
covered this a couple of years ago. I finally got around to buying a
set of 12 bulk containers to fill up a Walthers USRA 46' steel
gondola (the gon and loads are all lettered D&H, and I don't know if
those are correct schemes, but I'd like to know which schemes are
correct).

While the containers almost completely fill the width of the car,
they leave about 2 scale feet of empty space along the length. What
should be done in terms of spacers to fill the empty space? Where
should the spacers be located -- on the ends, in the middle, between
each set of containers, or what? And what should the spacers look
like?

Also, would the road names of the containers and the gon normally
match, and if not, would all the container road names normally match
each other or not?

Any answers or references to old discussions would be welcome.

Thanks,
John Thompson (modeling 1947-56)
Bellevue (Seattle) WA


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dave Nelson wrote:
Most conductor's logs will contain more than 25 trains. Tim and I have
looked at several thousand boxcar entries from hundreds of trains. They
give a clear and unambigous body of data that shows those railroads with the
most boxcars (e.g., PRR, NYC) have their cars recorded most often and those
with the least, least often, with everybody else in between, generally
falling in line by the size of their boxcar fleet.
I am convinced by these data for the overall national behavior. But if anything, these combined data will OBSCURE local differences with particular trains. Tim O'Connor has made this point: the modeler wonders if a PARTICULAR train exhibits the overall averages. Statistically and in common sense, the answer must be NO. To some extent, that's what Mike Brock is saying.
You can't have it both ways: the bigger the sample, the less information about particular trains. That solves some problems, sure, but obscures others.

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: Dalman HO trucks are both back in stock

buchwaldfam <duff@...>
 

Could you describe the differences between the plain and lateral
motion styles please?
Aside from the Andrews truck features, which class would the Soo
Line truck which Dennis Storzek posted last week fall into?
Also, are these trucks styrene, Acetal, or metal?

Thanks,
Phil Buchwald

--- In STMFC@..., Andy Carlson <midcentury@...> wrote:

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

Bruce Smith
 

On Jun 13, 2006, at 11:19 AM, Mike Brock wrote:
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.
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.
Mike, Mike, Mike...

What we find is these numbers in the trains that Fraley recorded. Wasn't Fraley working the extra board at this point? So while he might have gotten some "regular" trains as a substitute, he more than likely did not get a uniform sample. Since he did not record every train the sampling is flawed and cannot be used to make generalizations.

I don't, however,
suggest running 2 SP GS gons, Armand. Don't want to push the issue you
know.<G>.
I don't know - I plan to have on UP gon on the line since I bought it before I had to pay royalties on it.



Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Most conductor's logs will contain more than 25 trains. Tim and I have
looked at several thousand boxcar entries from hundreds of trains. They
give a clear and unambigous body of data that shows those railroads with the
most boxcars (e.g., PRR, NYC) have their cars recorded most often and those
with the least, least often, with everybody else in between, generally
falling in line by the size of their boxcar fleet. Yes, there is some
variation from the expected -- we'll see road A in 17th place where expected
but road B in 18th instead of 19th. But on the whole the correlation between
sightings and fleet size is very high... IIRC the correlation I calculated
exceeded 0.98.

What comes next is then the challenge of trying to describe what has been
seen. I think we've pretty much settled on the qualifiers: Post WWII, class
1 Mainline routes, US boxcars. There are some questions about North:South
routes, corner cases (e.g., Seattle, San Diego, Miami, and Bangor), Canadian
cars, rural vs urban locations, and the amount of influence from connections
(as in if you expected to see 1.25% and see 1.81%, does that mean
connections are usually 1.5X expected OR does it mean thinking in terms of 2
cars/100 modeled instead of 1 -- an insignificant variance?). Some of that
can be quite important and there just isn't enough data yet to close the
questions. But given what we can agree on so far -- Post WWII, Class 1
mainline, US Boxcars, AND perhaps most important, an absence of other more
complete data for the specific locationa and time of interest, a decent rule
of thumb is to build your boxcar roster according to the road ratios found
in the US fleet and then compose your trains as desired. Swap cars to/from
storage to add variety.

Dave Nelson
________________________________

A person intimately involved in statistical research would say that we
need way more data to be able to make real use of predictive models,
but we don't have all that consist data. A person might argue that we
need at least 25 trains worth of data to develop a model with a certain
confidence of being statistically useful.

Elden


Automobile cars

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim Gilbert wrote:
This assumes that few boxcars were in assigned service - in the Fall of
1947 when there was a severe boxcar shortage, there is evidence that
even automobile cars equipped with loading devices were reloaded with
Lumber on the west coast. With lesser boxcar shortages, those automobile
cars would have been returned to Detroit empty.
Let's not forget that auto assembly was significantly decentralized at that time, and the auto cars with loaders were carrying finished automobiles away from MANY plants all over the U.S., not just from Detroit, though of course a large percentage of cars WERE built in Detroit.

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: Variables from Digest 3180

Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Russ Strodtz wrote:

Tim,

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

Primarily because a higher percentage of boxcars were loaded on foreign roads than any other car type with the possible exception of general service boxcars because of the wide variety of commodities a boxcar could carry. Therefore, a foreign boxcar on a line was a normal event. Page 154 of Kent Healy's PERFORMANCE OF US RR'S SINCE WW II (Vantage Press, 1985) has the following table showing the proportion of Empty Freight Car Miles to Total Car Miles of the principal car types:

EMPTY CAR MILES as a Percent of Total Car Miles
Type 1948/1949 1956/1957 Boxcars 24% 26.5% Gons 40% 40% Hoppers 46% 46% Cov. Hoppers 53% 53% Reefers 38.5% 42%
Tank Cars 50% 51%
Flat Cars 35.5% 40%
Total All Types 35.3% 36.8%

Another way to phase this is ask the question how far did the average empty car return before it was reloaded which is what the percentage of empty car miles to loaded car miles answers per the table below:

Type 1948/1949 1956/1957
Boxcars 32% 36%
Gons 67% 67%
Hoppers 85% 85%
Cov. Hoppers 113% 113%
Reefers 63% 72%
Tank Cars 100% 104%
Flat Cars 55% 67%
Total All Types 55% 58%

The only car type having less than 55% ratio of empty to loaded car miles was Boxcars. An average of 67% of the Gons were returned to their original point of loading empty; the hopper average was 85%. Therefore, what the outbound load of either gons or hoppers was much more of a factor towards who owned the car than boxcars because a much higher proportion of boxcars were loaded in foreign boxcars than loads for gons or hoppers.

When you get to "guess" what percentage of hoppers or gons were on a road, where those loads were originated becomes a factor in assessing who was the owner of those gons & hoppers. No such "guess" is necessary for determining the ownership distribution of boxcars because almost any boxcar could be loaded with a variety of commodities loaded on a foreign road destined for termination on still another foreign road.

This assumes that few boxcars were in assigned service - in the Fall of 1947 when there was a severe boxcar shortage, there is evidence that even automobile cars equipped with loading devices were reloaded with Lumber on the west coast. With lesser boxcar shortages, those automobile cars would have been returned to Detroit empty. In the Spring of 1949 when there was a recession and the Fall Grain Rushes were over, empty eastbound automobile cars were sighted on Sherman Hill (vs. none during the Fall of 1947). As time went on, more boxcars were assigned, and that increased the percentage of empty car miles as did the decline in LCL.

But for the majority of the period from the end of WW II until the 1958 Recession, where boxcars were loaded were mostly a non-factor in determining who owned boxcars on a layout depicting that era. The 1958 Recession resulted in a glut of 40' boxcars which remained on storage tracks until suitable loads were found - for many of those forty-footers, no loads were ever found.


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.
SCO 90's were first issued in the early 1950's. They could be effective in routing home empties via short routes rather than the roundabout reverse routing dictated by the routing of the loads which the road had emptied. How effective the SCO 90's were in the routing of loads is a matter of how well the Car Service Rules were followed in reloading foreign road empties and routing them in the direction of the home road. I have seen little evidence that the "routing loads in the direction of the home road" was ever followed except when the Car Service Bureau sent out police to monitor a yard.

Regarding the T&NO and T&P boxcars in the Chicago Area, how about other non-Chicago roads like the MP, SOU, UP, SP-Pac, GN, NP, ACL, SAL, RDG, DL&W, NH, B&M?


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.
Agreed - the first priority for a railroad was to find a car suitable for loading a commodity - what empty was available was the first choice in the local yard. Often empties had to be plucked from passing trains, or brought in especially for that load. The problem with loading foreign gons and hoppers on line were that there were not enough commodities which could be reloaded on the foreign line; no such problem existed for boxcars.

Tim Gilbert


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

Miller, Andrew S. <asmiller@...>
 

The PRR K8 stock cars were Pratt truss. Up to 1952 the PRR had almost
1000 of them. See:

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/freightphotos.html?photo=PRR_128079_K8_3
4view.jpg&fr=clK8

regards,

Andy Miller



________________________________

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On
Behalf Of Anthony Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 12:57 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Seaboard steam era stock cars/Pratt truss
stock cars



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@... <mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com>
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Numbers/percentages of important box car types

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

Mike;
Yes, I am! I think your points are well taken, and I did NOT mean those
small facts to turn into this debate once again, but it is always an
interesting topic.

A person intimately involved in statistical research would say that we need
way more data to be able to make real use of predictive models, but we don't
have all that consist data. A person might argue that we need at least 25
trains worth of data to develop a model with a certain confidence of being
statistically useful.

I would still like to see a group of fleet breakdowns for various folks made
available. Bruce's is a good one; what about some others? And what do you
think those statistics on car numbers mean for your fleets in regards to
timeframe and location?

Elden

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Mike
Brock
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 12:20 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Numbers/percentages of important box car types

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











Yahoo! Groups Links


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

140241 - 140260 of 195395