Date   

Re: common cars with planked roofs

Miller, Andrew S. <asmiller@...>
 

The PRR K8 stock car had a longitudinally planked roof!


regards,

Andy Miller

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
ed_mines
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 1:44 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] common cars with planked roofs

What common freight cars had planked roofs in the mid '40s?

I think the Fowler box cars from both Canadian roads still had them.
C&NW's older single sheathed box cars too. Erie & NYC stock cars. A
couple of meat reefers too (Swift .....).

Anyone think of any others?

Ed




Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: AAR stockcar

ed_mines
 

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
wrote:
"..... an ARA
standard stock car design was adopted in 1927 – two of them
actually,
one of forty tons nominal capacity and the other of fifty tons
(though
it's doubtful that any railroad would have needed fifty ton stock
cars,
and none were actually built). Like other ARA standard house car
designs of the 1920s, it was based on the Pennsylvania RR X29 box
car.
This design became an AAR standard when the ARA was transformed
into
the AAR in 1934 and was shown as such in the 1937, 1940, 1943, and
1946
Car Builders' Cyclopedias; the later AAR recommended practice stock
car
Ben mentions, which was based on a Union Pacific design, did not
appear
in the Cycs until 1953.

To the best of my knowledge, only three railroads had cars that
were
derivatives of the ARA/AAR standard design, the Pennsylvania (class
K8), the Louisville & Nashville (series 19500-19699), and the
Atlantic
Coast Line (class N5), though the ACL cars had 4-4 Dreadnaught
steel
ends and Murphy rectangular panel steel roofs instead of the
single-sheathed wood ends and wood roofs shown in the ARA/AAR
drawings.
Most railroads that had large fleets of stock cars preferred cars
built to their own designs or (increasingly, in later years) cars
rebuilt from obsolete box cars.

The only HO scale model that even comes close to the ARA/AAR
standard
design (and it's not very close) is the Walthers ex-Train Miniature
stock car, which has sides and side framing like the ARA car but
the
wrong ends, roof, and underframe.
What about the Ambroid stock car kit?

Ed


common cars with planked roofs

ed_mines
 

What common freight cars had planked roofs in the mid '40s?

I think the Fowler box cars from both Canadian roads still had them.
C&NW's older single sheathed box cars too. Erie & NYC stock cars. A
couple of meat reefers too (Swift .....).

Anyone think of any others?

Ed


Re: AAR stockcar

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 18, 2006, at 8:57 AM, benjaminfrank_hom wrote:

Doug Harding asked:
"Can anyone offer any information on an AAR stockcar design? Or
point me to a source of AAR freight car designs/drawings. I have
searched the group files and can find nothing related to an AAR
stockcar design."
"I ask because someone on another list said the Broadway Limited
Pennsy K7A stockcar was an AAR design, which I thought was a unique
Pennsy design."

"Someone on another list" needs to get his facts straight. No
matter what Broadway Limited would have you believe, the PRR Class
K7A stockcars were unique to the Pennsy; in fact, they were rebuilt
from Class X24 automobile box cars which pre-dated the formation of
the AAR by 20 years.
Ben is, of course, correct. It may be added, however, that an ARA
standard stock car design was adopted in 1927 – two of them actually,
one of forty tons nominal capacity and the other of fifty tons (though
it's doubtful that any railroad would have needed fifty ton stock cars,
and none were actually built). Like other ARA standard house car
designs of the 1920s, it was based on the Pennsylvania RR X29 box car.
This design became an AAR standard when the ARA was transformed into
the AAR in 1934 and was shown as such in the 1937, 1940, 1943, and 1946
Car Builders' Cyclopedias; the later AAR recommended practice stock car
Ben mentions, which was based on a Union Pacific design, did not appear
in the Cycs until 1953.

To the best of my knowledge, only three railroads had cars that were
derivatives of the ARA/AAR standard design, the Pennsylvania (class
K8), the Louisville & Nashville (series 19500-19699), and the Atlantic
Coast Line (class N5), though the ACL cars had 4-4 Dreadnaught steel
ends and Murphy rectangular panel steel roofs instead of the
single-sheathed wood ends and wood roofs shown in the ARA/AAR drawings.
Most railroads that had large fleets of stock cars preferred cars
built to their own designs or (increasingly, in later years) cars
rebuilt from obsolete box cars.

The only HO scale model that even comes close to the ARA/AAR standard
design (and it's not very close) is the Walthers ex-Train Miniature
stock car, which has sides and side framing like the ARA car but the
wrong ends, roof, and underframe.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: AAR stockcar

Charlie Vlk
 

Doug, Ben-
Broadway Limited has never tried to pass off the PRR K7A as being correct for anything but PRR (having never referred to the car as anything except a K7A), and has worked with the PRRTHS Modeling Committee to make it correct for the PRR.... there are further tooling changes coming up per their recommendations, including new truck sideframes.
The inclusion of bogus roadnames on the K7A body is a commercial reality of hard-tooled products following narrowly road specific prototypes.... and those that have bought the Wabash, N&W, etc.. cars have not caught any life-threatening illnesses from them, at least as far as has been reported. Most of the people that bought them even enjoy the Hog, Cattle, and Chicken noises as well!!!
Happy Model Railroading....
Charlie Vlk
Railroad Model Resources




Doug Harding asked:
""Someone on another list" needs to get his facts straight. No
matter what Broadway Limited would have you believe, the PRR Class
K7A stockcars were unique to the Pennsy; in fact, they were rebuilt
from Class X24 automobile box cars which pre-dated the formation of
the AAR by 20 years.

Ben Hom

.


Re: Allied Full Cushion Wheel Diameter

Rod Miller
 

Thank you Richard (and Bruce).

Rod

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

On Dec 17, 2006, at 2:15 PM, Rod Miller wrote:

Precision Scale's #9129 Allied Full Cushion (AFC) kit has 33" diameter
wheels. Weaver Models' troop sleepers (TS) have 36" diameter wheels on
their AFC trucks. Which is correct?

Searching the RPCYCs and the archives of this group didn't yield an
answer. A drawing in the May 1991 MR shows 33" wheels on a TS car
converted to express service by the NYC.
The drawings of both the freight (single brake) and passenger (clasp brake) versions of the Allied Full Cushion trucks in the 1946 Car Builders' Cyclopedia show 33" wheels. The way it looks to me, I don't think 36" wheels would clear the brake rigging. And as between PS an Weaver, I'd tend to trust PS; Weaver isn't known for meticulous prototype research.
Richard Hendrickson


Re: AAR stockcar

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Doug Harding asked:
"Can anyone offer any information on an AAR stockcar design? Or
point me to a source of AAR freight car designs/drawings. I have
searched the group files and can find nothing related to an AAR
stockcar design."

The only AAR standard stock car design that I know of was the 1951
AAR stock car, which only the Union Pacific and D&RGW used. (The
Athearn stockcar follows this prototype.) Drawings and information
appeared in the July 1990 issue of Mainline Modeler.


"I ask because someone on another list said the Broadway Limited
Pennsy K7A stockcar was an AAR design, which I thought was a unique
Pennsy design."

"Someone on another list" needs to get his facts straight. No
matter what Broadway Limited would have you believe, the PRR Class
K7A stockcars were unique to the Pennsy; in fact, they were rebuilt
from Class X24 automobile box cars which pre-dated the formation of
the AAR by 20 years.


Ben Hom


AAR stockcar

Douglas Harding
 

Can anyone offer any information on an AAR stockcar design? Or point me to a
source of AAR freight car designs/drawings. I have searched the group files
and can find nothing related to an AAR stockcar design. I ask because
someone on another list said the Broadway Limited Pennsy K7A stockcar was an
AAR design, which I thought was a unique Pennsy design.

The closest reference I have found is a reference to the Athearn 40'
stockcar being an AAR design, while I thought the Athearn car was roughly
patterned after a UP design.

Doug Harding
Iowa Central Railroad
www.iowacentralrr.org

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.23/591 - Release Date: 12/17/2006
3:17 PM


Re: AAR stockcar

Charles Hladik
 

Thought that now was the time for a little levity.
And just how many head of cattle can be put into a forty foot car?



Only 10, after that there's more feet.
Chuck Hladik


Re: What defines an AAR boxcar?

Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Dennis Storzek wrote:
I'm getting a chuckle out of all the different AAR standards, because
they don't exist. . .

I beg to differ, Dennis. As Ed Hawkins observed, the Cycs used
AAR terminology, and they DO most certainly refer to such things as the
"1942 design" for these various modifications. See any AAR standard car
drawing in a Cyc. This was NOT made up by modelers.
Tony,

I did a bit of research with the Cyc's at my disposal, checking the
terminology used in the captions of the drawings presented for the AAR
Standard Boxcar:

1940 "A.A.R 1937 design standard 40 ton and 50 ton steel..."
1943 Same, with a note on an optional increase in height to 10'-6".
1946 "Modified A.A.R. Standard"
1953 "A.A.R. Standard 40 ft. 6 in. 40 - and 50 – ton box car"
1957 Same as 1953

So, I'll repeat Kurt's question, where do I find a drawing of this
1944 AAR standard design? It doesn't exist, except in the broadest
sense, that being the AAR standard design as it happened to be built
that year.

Incidentally, the AAR 1942 standard design boxcar is a fifty foot car.

To answer Kurt's question, yes if the AAR has kept archival copies of
all the issues of the AAR Freight Car Manual (or whatever the exact
tile is) and all its supplements, I suppose a full set of all the
drawing revisions could be obtained. That is where my copies of the
drawings came from. I don't know of anyone who has tried to compile a
full set, nor would it really be very useful.

Unlike the DoA drawings for Sherman tanks, the AAR drawings were not
production drawings; while labeled "standard" they were really no more
than recommended practice, that members of the association could
choose to adopt, or modify, as they saw fit. The AAR's interest in
publishing the drawings was to foster standardization to enable car
repair facilities to operate with smaller inventory, and make a market
for specialized steel shapes that could reduce tare weight without
sacrificing strength. The car builders, on the other hand, had a
vested interest in developing "new and improved" specialties to gain
further market share. It is obvious that anytime a supplier developed
a new roof, door, or end, it was quickly written into the standard, or
shall we say, the standard broadened to incorporate the new item. By
the time the Plate 1500K drawing I wrote about Friday was drawn in
1962, there was also a Plate 1501K drawing with the same title that
shows the same boxcar but with a bank roof and a generic end (Ed
Hawkins said NSC, but I believe it was just meant to represent a
generic pressed end). This Plate 1501K drawing also shows a Superior
panel door, while Plate 1500K has a Younstown. Both drawings have the
same 1937 date and identical revision histories, which leads me to
believe that one is a derivative of the other.

Indeed, by 1962 there were three alternate door widths called out (8',
9', and 10') in addition to the original 6' door, and four additional
Plates that show the proper method of attaching both Youngstown and
Superior door hardware. There is even a drawing that details the wide
bottom rungs of the Pullman-Standard end ladders, thus bringing that
detail within the scope of the "standard" also. That drawing (Plate
1547) is dated March 1, 1951.

Yes, the AAR did design an underframe, back in 1932, and tested it to
destruction before incorporating it into their "standard" of the time,
but it's use was never a requirement. The only requirement for
interchange service I'm aware of is a minimum value of cross sectional
area for steel center sills.

I realize that we as modelers sometimes have to invent terminology for
instances where the prototype didn't feel distinction was necessary,
but we need to be careful to invent DISCRIPTIVE terminology. Tell me a
car is the AAR standard car with improved Dreadnaught ends and a
rectangular panel roof, and I'll have some idea what you're talking
about. Tell me it's a "1944 AAR Standard" car, and I'll have no idea
what it is, and no way to look up a reference.

Dennis


Re: Allied Full Cushion Wheel Diameter

Bruce Smith
 

On Sun, December 17, 2006 4:15 pm, Rod Miller wrote:
O scale dept. time.

Precision Scale's #9129 Allied Full Cushion (AFC) kit has 33" diameter
wheels. Weaver Models' troop sleepers (TS) have 36" diameter wheels on
their AFC trucks. Which is correct?
Pullman Troop sleepers were eqipped with 33" wheels.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


Re: Allied Full Cushion Wheel Diameter

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 17, 2006, at 2:15 PM, Rod Miller wrote:

Precision Scale's #9129 Allied Full Cushion (AFC) kit has 33" diameter
wheels. Weaver Models' troop sleepers (TS) have 36" diameter wheels on
their AFC trucks. Which is correct?

Searching the RPCYCs and the archives of this group didn't yield an
answer. A drawing in the May 1991 MR shows 33" wheels on a TS car
converted to express service by the NYC.
The drawings of both the freight (single brake) and passenger (clasp brake) versions of the Allied Full Cushion trucks in the 1946 Car Builders' Cyclopedia show 33" wheels. The way it looks to me, I don't think 36" wheels would clear the brake rigging. And as between PS an Weaver, I'd tend to trust PS; Weaver isn't known for meticulous prototype research.

Richard Hendrickson


Prototype Rails 2007 Clinic Schedule

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

The current clinic schedule as well as other information about Prototype Rails 2007 can now be found on the Prototype Rails website at:

http://home.brevard.net/~brockm/prototyperails/index.html

A few photos of "The Usual Suspects" can also be found at the site.

Mike Brock


Allied Full Cushion Wheel Diameter

Rod Miller
 

O scale dept. time.

Precision Scale's #9129 Allied Full Cushion (AFC) kit has 33" diameter
wheels. Weaver Models' troop sleepers (TS) have 36" diameter wheels on
their AFC trucks. Which is correct?

Searching the RPCYCs and the archives of this group didn't yield an
answer. A drawing in the May 1991 MR shows 33" wheels on a TS car
converted to express service by the NYC.

If the wheel diameter when in troop sleeper service was 36 inches, were
the wheels usually changed to 33 inch wheels when the cars were
converted to non TS service by railroad owners, which would be the case
for the NYC car described above?

Thanks

Rod Miller


Re: What defines an AAR boxcar?

Russell Strodtz <sheridan@...>
 

Ah yes, there is the mystery of the whole game. On track charts or station
maps it is almost always quite easy to see what an earlier layout was and
quite often the date of removal is shown.

Car plans are just the opposite. Even with new cars that are still being
built what you often see is revision "G", "H", or whatever. While they often
indicate what was revised you can not see the old information on the
drawing.

I recall that there is one series of CB&Q cars that up to a certain number
refers to a CB&Q drawing for what I faintly remember as the hand brake
layout. Subsequent cars were built using a CMStP&P layout and reference
their drawing. Is that drawing provided? Of course not.

From what I've seen the SLSF seldom created any drawings for the cars they
constructed. A lot of vendor's drawings all bundled together with an
occasional car number series written in an empty space in pencil.

Found a GN drawing for the conversion of a already very small two bay hopper
into a even smaller covered hopper. I have seen both versions of this series
so I though I'd assemble a folder with a set of drawings.
Think I did get the project done but it took a few hours. There was only one
drawing that showed where the cuts needed to be made but everything else was
just references to the cars, either before or after.

Things should never be too easy.

Russ

----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Saturday, 16 December, 2006 12:24
Subject: [STMFC] Re: What defines an AAR boxcar?


Dennis Storzek:
> I'm getting a chuckle out of all the different AAR standards,
> because they don't exist.

This is what we get for attaching special significance to, even
venerating, objects which their originators viewed only in terms of
their utility. I run into this all the time in analyzing Pullman
records - original linen drawings re-inked and annotated with
changes to the point that the original information is lost, entries
on so-called "running records" of a car's history erased or
obliterated to make way for subsequent entries, revision notes that
tease without informing ("Rev. D: Window band striping now 2 1/2"
wide" says nothing about what the previous width was if the revision
also changed the dimension on the drawing).....

Basically, we are historians trying to make sense of records
generated by people who cared very little about history. Where is
that car NOW; is it loaded or empty NOW; what is its condition NOW;
does it need repairs NOW? Today and tomorrow were important;
yesterday and last year were not. The records and drawings were
structured to show the viewer, at a glance, what the situation was
NOW, no matter when "NOW" was. We shouldn't fault them because many
decades later we think we would have done things differently. Nor
should we seek order and structure when none was present initially.

The resulting variety might make the historian's job frustrating,
but it should delight the modeler. As modelers, perhaps we should
focus more on the delight and not get too hung up on the frustration.

Tom Madden


Re: UCLA Library Images

Barry Bennett <Barrybennetttoo@...>
 

My point being that there are only a few open doors, which indicates to
me that the spirit of the closed doors rule appears to be followed if
not the letter of the rule, which fits in with the comments made
earlier by people associated with SPCo.

Barry


--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
wrote:

On Dec 16, 2006, at 2:05 AM, Barry Bennett wrote:

Anybody want to count the number of open doors?
Yes, Barry, but open doors were common on cars in yards. The issue
we've discussed previously on this list is what the rules were about
open doors on cars in motion (doors were supposed to be secured shut)
and how often, in fact, cars with open doors were seen in trains
(very
seldom).

Richard Hendrickson


Re: UCLA Library Images

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 16, 2006, at 2:05 AM, Barry Bennett wrote:

Anybody want to count the number of open doors?
Yes, Barry, but open doors were common on cars in yards. The issue we've discussed previously on this list is what the rules were about open doors on cars in motion (doors were supposed to be secured shut) and how often, in fact, cars with open doors were seen in trains (very seldom).

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Were all Dreadnaught ends made by Standard Railway Equipment?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:17 PM, Dennis Storzek wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., Tony Thompson <thompsonmarytony@...>
The term "Dreadnaught" appears to have only been used by
SRECo,
though I haven't noticed a mark indicating it was registered as a
trademark. But others made the same design. All the early SP 1937 AAR
cars had "dreadnaught-type" ends made by Union Metal Products.Whethr
there was a license for the design, from SRECo, I don't know.

Anthony Thompson
Dept. of Materials Science & Engineering
University of California, Berkeley
thompsonmarytony@...

Tony,

I've never made a major study of the origin of this end design, But I
believe it predates the SREC ownership. Like so many other proprietary
items in the SREC line, it appears it was developed elsewhere, and
purchased and marketed by SREC.

For evidence I present everal photos in the 1931 Car Builders Cyc,
which show the early dreadnaught end, and are captioned ,"Dreadnaught
two piece steel end for box cars. Union Metal Products Co." Standard
Railway Equipment Co. was showing roofs in this edition of the Cyc,
but not ends.
Yes, but at that time the Union Metal Products Co. was, in fact, a
subsidiary of the Standard Railway Equipment Co., as evidenced by the
fact that both Union and SRE used the "Murphy" trade name for freight
car ends (Union) and roofs (SRE), Murphy having been SRE's founder.
Union wasn't entirely absorbed into SRE until the late 1930s – the 1940
CBCyc is the first one that shows Dreadnaught ends as being made by SRE
– but at least as far back as the mid-1920s Union was controlled by
SRE.

Interestingly, this is the "innie" end, which modelers have been
calling a "reverse Dreadnaught", to differentiate it from the later
ends where the pressings faced outward. Problem is, if this is the
original design, then this should be THE Dreadnaught end, and all the
other "outie" ends should be reverse Dreadnaught. Which just points up
the problem with using names devised by modelers; eventually it comes
to light that the assumptions were wrong, and we are stuck with names
that don't accurately describe the hardware, and are confusing as well.
Obviously, names devised by modelers can be a problem (e.g., the
long-standing practice of calling all trucks with the journal boxes
cast integral with the side frames "Bettendorf," as some modelers and
manufacturers still persist in doing, ignoring the extensive
terminology of the truck manufacturers themselves which makes it
possible to differentiate the many different variations of the ARA/AAR
truck designs). On the other hand, when the manufacturers and the
railroad industry as a whole do not differentiate between one design
and another, as in the case of many variations on the basic theme of
the Dreadnaught end, modelers have to invent something, as the
differences between e.g. inward stamped and outward stamped ends, or
square-cornered vs. round-cornered, are important issues for accurate
prototype modeling, though seldom or never mentioned in the CBCycs or
other railway engineering literature. Sometimes, as in this case, we
can't resurrect the "correct" terms because they didn't exist, and then
what matters is we can come to some agreement about the terms we're
using, even when they aren't sanctioned by the prototype documentation.
SRE did, of course, adopt the term "Improved Dreadnaught end" for the
postwar ends with "rolling pin shaped" main ribs, but then continued to
use the term for the mid-1950s version with straight tapered main ribs.
Of course, "rolling pin shaped" doesn't appear anywhere in the
prototype documentation, but what's a modeler to do? We have to be
able to differentiate one Improved Dreadnaught end design from another,
whether or not SRE bothered to do so. When extensive research doesn't
turn up the necessary terminology, we're obliged to invent it.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Car movements

Malcolm Laughlin <mlaughlinnyc@...>
 

Posted by: "Frank Greene" ) I understood everything you said except this. Are you saying the home
road's cars earned the same PD on foreign roads as the foreign roads' cars
earned on the home road?
==================

Per diem was a daily payment, at a fixed rate, paid by each railroad to the owner of any railroad-owned car on its railroad at midnight.


Malcolm Laughlin, Editor 617-489-4383
New England Rail Shipper Directories
19 Holden Road, Belmont, MA 02478


Re: UCLA Library Images

bowie1793
 

I lived in the area and went to high school there located adjacent to the pedestrian bridge over the 'cornfield/river' yards, (N.Broadway & Bishop Rds.). The yard was always packed with cars. At times it seemed you could hop from roof to roof between Broadway and Spring St., west to east, and though the yards were our playground we never did.
Joe Jacques

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:
Paul Koehler wrote:
The shot was taken from the pedestrian bridge that went over the
Cornfield/Links yard just north of downtown. You can see Southern
Pacific's
A shed just behind the freight cars and beyond you also see Los
Angeles City
Hall and the Terminal Annex Post Office next door to LAUPT.
Paul, the yard looks really full. Was this normal, or is it a
coincidence--or an artifact of the camera angle?

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





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

138361 - 138380 of 196937