Date   

When Did DT&I Buy 65 Santa Fe Fe-13 or FE-20 Box cars ?

gary laakso
 

The Mainline Modeler of March, 1991 at page 27 features a picture of the former Santa Fe 50 foot boxcars in DT&I colors but the author was not sure what class of cars were purchased from the Santa Fe by DT&I. My Sunshine Prototype Data Sheet has no mention of the sale. What decals would work for these cars as DT&I cars?


gary laakso
south of Mike Brock
vasa0vasa@earthlink.net


Re: Mantua/Tyco tank car

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Friends,

To Ed's question, let's add the Hobbyline/Lionel tank. As I remember it, the frame was pretty crude, but the tank and dome were nicely done for the time. Did it have a prototype? Could it be shortened or used as is on another frame to represent something close to real life?

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

ed_mines wrote:

Are these close to any real cars?

Before there was so much prototype information available I used to have about a dozen plastic tank cars on the shelf in what I thought looked like a pretty realistic train.

I liked the aforementioned Mantua cars best. I also liked the short lived Walthers car which I think was originally tooled by Train Miniature. It was similar to if not identical to Varney.

The Athearn car didn't match any of the others. It was bigger and the dome had less height.

Mantua "heavies" (were they originally Lindburg?), Red Caboose, Intermountain, the Gould car recently dragged through the mud with 2 different domes; there were a lot of different cars.

Surprisingly, one part of the Athearn car that was better than any of the other cars - the bent wire railing. Lining up the cast plastic ends with wire in the Tichy cars was some pain in the butt. I had a lot of trouble getting the railing holders to stay on the gould/Tichy car - they kept on popping off.

Did any of these cars have real prototypes?

Ed


B&O Freight Car Red

Gene Deimling <losgatos48@...>
 

I had read several different accounts as to the proper shade of red
for B&O boxcars in the post-1946 era. The few color photos I recall
seem to lean towards a bright orange/red oxide color. What shade of
Polyscale paint would best fit a wagontop boxcar during the early
1950s prior to the use of the billboard lettering. Would the pre-1946
be similar or more like Polyscale freight car red?

Thanks,
Gene Deimling


Mantua/Tyco tank car

ed_mines
 

Are these close to any real cars?

Before there was so much prototype information available I used to
have about a dozen plastic tank cars on the shelf in what I thought
looked like a pretty realistic train.

I liked the aforementioned Mantua cars best. I also liked the short
lived Walthers car which I think was originally tooled by Train
Miniature. It was similar to if not identical to Varney.

The Athearn car didn't match any of the others. It was bigger and the
dome had less height.

Mantua "heavies" (were they originally Lindburg?), Red Caboose,
Intermountain, the Gould car recently dragged through the mud with 2
different domes; there were a lot of different cars.

Surprisingly, one part of the Athearn car that was better than any of
the other cars - the bent wire railing. Lining up the cast plastic
ends with wire in the Tichy cars was some pain in the butt. I had a
lot of trouble getting the railing holders to stay on the gould/Tichy
car - they kept on popping off.

Did any of these cars have real prototypes?

Ed


(No subject)

Jim King
 

The SRHA debuted its latest HO kit at the NMRA Detroit show last weekend,
thanks to the kindness of Gary Wright handling the sales. On 8/11, these
kits will be available at the Norcross, GA train show. Visit the SRHA table
to pick up a couple, along with the new calendars and other goodies. The
kit represents Southern's home-built 41'6" flat car in the 116850-117354
series, built in 1926 and lasting in revenue service until 1973. Many were
converted to non-revenue service starting in the late 50s for uses like
derrick boom cars, equipment hauling, wheel flats and transfer caboose
frames. Some can be seen today running around in orange with black NS
lettering in ribbon rail train service. (We have a boom car/flat car
conversion at Spencer.)



The kit's castings include a vacuum/pressure cast outer frame with separate
inner frame containing the centersills and a sheet of details. Patterns
were made via 3D CAD/rapid prototyping process, resulting in exquisite
detail. Included in the kit is a brass weight, Tichy trucks w/ Red Caboose
metal wheels, Kadee "whisker" scale couplers, Tichy details and brake gear
and a laser cut wood deck with over 900 simulated nail holes!



Price is $44 for non-members plus shipping. Visit the SRHA web site
(www.srha.net) to order now if you can't make the show.



Jim King

Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.

www.smokymountainmodelworks.com


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the prototype

RICH NUNN <flyingtigers_nunn@...>
 

Dear Denny and other modlers/cognescenti:

Well said Dr. Denny- onto better modeling and leave the other crap in the dirt.

Thanks,

Rich Nunn


---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the prototype

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

I dunno, you guys. Be aware that WHAT you say can be totally misunderstood by HOW you say it.

Lest we forget it, no matter how much we as modelers earnestly yearn for and try to replicate literal prototypical accuracy, we won't even begin to touch the edge until we reach 1:1. No matter how much we may yearn to believe it not so, or even downright deny it, our hobby resides in a highly imaginary world the details of which are quite different for each one us, and our enjoyment of it still will always have a very high vicarious quotient. Any attempt to define that world for all of us is futile, to say the least.

Tichy tank car? Well, I am currently quite persuaded to go right out and find a kit and build it as a very accurate prototype -perhaps a prototype that forever will only reside comfortably in my mind- but an accurate prototype nonetheless.

Lastly:

Is this a closed fraternity of steam era freight car cogniscenti where only those with the secret knock dare enter; or an open forum where members of the wider hobby can be educated and importuned to embrace a totally interesting and very constructive modeling concept? The former is too easy.The latter takes more personal discipline- but it is also the tide that raises all boats.

Denny :-)

--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

James Eckman
 

Why subscribe to STMFC if you didn't want build accurate prototype cars? Since the emphasis of this group is standard gauge of a relatively modern era, interchange is a fact of life so even with a freelance railroad it's nice to have the visiting cars right.

Of course if one is a secret masochist it might be another reason ;) I like earlier periods (pre-1900's), but even then there are useful tips that popup on this group that I can use or details like servicing journals that are fun to read.

Certainly if you need a large, varied freight car fleet, you may need some stand ins that aren't the best for operations purposes until you can get or make better cars, I always liked the NEBW grading system for cars, maybe we should carry it one step further:

A - Car is perfectly prototypical, no visible mistakes, perfect dimensions, an accurate color scheme and lettered correctly.
B - Car is close prototypical, no 'easily' visible mistakes, dimensional errors that require measuring tools to find, an accurate color scheme and lettered mostly correctly with maybe minor errors.
C - Car is reasonably prototypical, some mistakes that are apparent to knowledgeable people, dimensions may be a little off, an accurate color scheme and and any blatant lettering mistakes easily corrected with redecaling the car.
D - The car has a prototype of sorts, even if it is not the one it's lettered for and has about the right shape. Also blatant mistakes like wrong roof type or ends, colors that aren't that close to the prototype portrayed and serious reporting errors or other details that entail some serious paint or decal work to fix.
F - This is a fantasy car with no prototype, details are totally bogus, colors are way off and the lettering is mostly nonsense.

I assume all cars roll on the right track and couple, otherwise they don't count as cars and are 'scenic accessories'.

From this list you can see what I think is important when you look at a freight car in a layout context.
#1 The colors about right, no pinkish or purplish cars please unless that's the prototype's color! ;)
#2 The reporting marks look right, there are no blatant errors and the minor errors are not readily visible.
#3 Close to the right dimensions with no blatant error in details.

Your mileage may vary!

Jim


Re: Fidelity to the prototype -- and giraffes

Peter Weiglin
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

<snip> all the bogus freight cars you like, even Tyco searchlight cars
or stock cars with giraffe heads sticking out of holes in the roof.

and Mike Fortney responded:

Bogus? Drat! There goes my plans for a solid unit train of giraffe
cars on my interurban Illinois Terminal layout!

= = =

The danger with giraffe stock cars on an interurban line is the
potential interference fit with the overhead wire, particularly the
cross spans.

Seriously, this list's dedication to information leading to prototype
fidelity keeps us all "honest." Yes, prototype fidelity is the goal,
and we know going in that, in some way, we cannot avoid falling short
of complete accuracy. But we have the standard set out before us, and
each of us can make his/her own decision about how closely to approach
that standard in constructing a given model, or railroad.

We will inevitably make compromises, but it's good to know as much as
possible about the "ideal," so that we can make those compromises
intelligently.

Each of us picks our own "compromise point;" the place at which we say
it's "good enough for me." It seems that most of the differences of
opinion we encounter stem from differing priorities or compromise
points among the participants in the discussion.

But the more we learn, the more our compromises occur at higher and
higher levels. Which is infinitely more satisfying than not knowing
or caring about prototype fidelity at all.


Peter Weiglin
Amelia, OH


Re: Tichy kits

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

Mont;

I have also heard the second half of the story on the Gould tank car, and
there are some that swear that there was a car in SoCal "back when" that was
used to verify measurements off the USRA car plans; either way, we will never
know for sure, something I have learned over many years of watching real
railroading and finding photos that proved my assumptions incorrect over, and
over, and over..... I also saw a photo (maybe even yours?), a long time ago,
that very closely matched the car with the larger dome, also in UTLX paint,
so I did the same thing; painted it for UTLX and call it close enough. There
appeared to be some very minor differences in the underframe, but it looked
like an early AC&F car in many ways, including the stub sills.



In any event, the car was a pleasure to build, and I will also look for
opportunities to use parts from that kit for kitbashes of other cars, when I
get back to my tank car fleet (I am pretty busy with some cars for TKM, and a
few others I just had to finish).



BTW, with all this talk of the Athearn tank cars, I went back and found the
issue of Mainline Modeler that had the car in it I used to kitbash the
Athearn 3-dome. The real car appears to be an early GATC around 10k car with
very short, fat domes, and matches the Athearn car in almost all ways except
being about a fifth shorter (I measured the Ath car, and it roughs out to
about 13k). I cut the ends off an Athearn car at the bands, shortened the
whole thing similar to what Richard did, and it is a VERY close match. I
plan on adding better relief valves and walkways and such, but I have pretty
much finished the underframe detailing, and it looks pretty good. We have to
do something about this lack of good tank car models, and I am working on it
any way I can.



Thanks again for the input!



Elden Gatwood







________________________________

From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mont
Switzer
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:36 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Tichy kits



Elden,

I know I probably will incur Richard's ire with this, but I photographed a
UTLX tank car in the late 1960's that sure looks like the Tichy tank car. I
still need to do a lot of homework on it as well as compare details as I
build the Tichy car, but it sure looks close TO ME. UTLX had a few strays so
I might get lucky. That project is in the top 1/3 of the "to do" pile.

Mont Switzer

"Gatwood, Elden J SAD " <Elden.J.Gatwood@sad01.usace.army.mil
<mailto:Elden.J.Gatwood%40sad01.usace.army.mil> > wrote:
Thanks for the good perspective, Mont and Tim; and for the info, Ben and
Richard. I do enjoy building kits, and was planning on doing that car with
Ted's beautiful NYC/P&LE decals.

I also really enjoyed constructing their tank car kit, and I run it even
though it has no currently-documented prototype, simply because I enjoyed the
construction so much, like the looks of it, and appreciate the 4-course tank
in a consist of otherwise similar AC&F prototypes.

Much appreciated,

Elden Gatwood

________________________________

From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
Mont
Switzer
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 8:26 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Tichy kits

Before you buy Tichy RTR give yourself the pleasure of bulding one of the
kits. They are extremely enjoyable to build and easy to modify IF needed.
Everything fits so well and the styrene is easy to work. Most relaxing.

Mont Switzer

timboconnor@comcast.net <mailto:timboconnor%40comcast.net>
<mailto:timboconnor%40comcast.net> wrote:

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@worldnet.att.net
<mailto:b.hom%40worldnet.att.net>
<mailto:b.hom%40worldnet.att.net> >
The Tichy Rebuilt USRA Steel Boxcar kit is correct for only one
prototype: PMcK&Y/P&LE Lot 630-B/638-B (rebuilt 1935/1936). The
kit is accurate, but suffers from a lack of NBW castings on the side
grabs (as does Tichy's USRA SS boxcar kits), a so-so rectangular
panel roof, and some pretty substandard decals. See Ted Culotta's
article in the July 2004 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman for more
on upgrading this kit.
I don't know if you can still get them, but CDS produced some very
good quality dry transfers for this kit.

Personally I like the kit very much; it builds into a very distinctive box
car. Also, the doors can be built to open or close, without sacrificing
anything appearance-wise.

Tim O'Connor

---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.





---------------------------------
Building a website is a piece of cake.
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.


Re: Tichy kits

Rob & Bev Manley
 

Mont,
I made the same point in my Resin & Plastic freight car clinic. These are great kits to get you used to the idea of drilling holes and adding wire to detail to a car. They make an easy transition to the world of resin.

Rob Manley

----- Original Message -----
From: Mont Switzer
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Tichy kits


Before you buy Tichy RTR give yourself the pleasure of bulding one of the kits. They are extremely enjoyable to build and easy to modify IF needed. Everything fits so well and the styrene is easy to work. Most relaxing.

Mont Switzer

timboconnor@comcast.net wrote:
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@worldnet.att.net>
> The Tichy Rebuilt USRA Steel Boxcar kit is correct for only one
> prototype: PMcK&Y/P&LE Lot 630-B/638-B (rebuilt 1935/1936). The
> kit is accurate, but suffers from a lack of NBW castings on the side
> grabs (as does Tichy's USRA SS boxcar kits), a so-so rectangular
> panel roof, and some pretty substandard decals. See Ted Culotta's
> article in the July 2004 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman for more
> on upgrading this kit.

I don't know if you can still get them, but CDS produced some very
good quality dry transfers for this kit.

Personally I like the kit very much; it builds into a very distinctive box
car. Also, the doors can be built to open or close, without sacrificing
anything appearance-wise.

Tim O'Connor

---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
... scratching head .... ponder .... ponder .... light bulb!!!!

CMA, of course! Creative Model Associates, affiliate of Tichy. CMA makes some really wonderful structures (e.g. PFE ice dock).
Very true about the ice deck. Miles superior to that piece of ---
from Walthers.

Tony Thompson now official {Mike Brock said so] PFE guru
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Mike Fortney
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
wrote:
<snip> all the bogus freight cars you like, even Tyco searchlight cars
or stock cars with giraffe heads sticking out of holes in the roof.

Bogus? Drat! There goes my plans for a solid unit train of giraffe
cars on my interurban Illinois Terminal layout!

Mike Fortney


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

John Van Buekenhout writes:

"How long do we have to contend with these tactics or attacks against Tichy?"

Actually, I have not seen any "attacks" against Tichy. As I stated and the rules have always included..."Members are permitted to criticize or praise manufacturer's products free from criticism from other members." Note that the rule does not include the freedom to criticize a manufacturer, just the manufacturer's product. A twist of words? Not at all. One of the strengths of the STMFC is the analysis of a model and its fidelity to a prototype. Thus, modelers can learn that the excellent Intermountain reefer that is painted in the PFE paint scheme and lettered as an R-40-23 is, indeed, a very nice model of a PFE R-40-23. It is also a nice model of an NP reefer. OTOH, it is not a very good model of the countless other renditions produced by Intermountain...from meat reefers to whatever. The beauty of the STMFC is that we all don't have to become guru's of PFE reefers [ for example ] to be aware of the accuracy of the Intermountain car lettered for the PFE R-40-23. We have Tony Thompson...among others...to thank for that. So, while the same Intermountain model of the PFE R-40-23 as painted in, say, a meat reefer scheme may be severely criticized, the STMFC does not criticize Intermountain for producing the bogus model. It is not the business of the STMFC as to how a company conducts its business. It IS the business of the STMFC to analyze and comment on the accuracy of a model to its prototype.

Incidentally, while we're at it, I might note that members don't always agree about a model's fidelity to a prototype. That's good. Some modelers might be sensitive to the accuracy of a roof but not the underbody. Others might object to missing rivets or object to paint colors. Some modelers might object to the accuracy of the springs in a model truck but ignore the inaccuracy of the truck's wheel base. Members present information and other members digest it and decide for themselves how accurate they wish their models to be. Through it all, however, is the continuing overall drive by the STMFC to seek better accuacy.

Mike Brock
STMFC Owner


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Tim O'Connor
 

John Van Buekenhout wrote:
How long do we have to contend with these tactics or attacks against
Tichy? J.A. Van Buekenhout, CMA

... scratching head .... ponder .... ponder .... light bulb!!!!

CMA, of course! Creative Model Associates, affiliate of Tichy.
CMA makes some really wonderful structures (e.g. PFE ice dock).

Tim O'Connor


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

William Bryk <wmbryk@...>
 

Criticism such as we see on this list is the means by which one's work can
be improved. Not all of us express ourselves with exquisite tact: some of
us are better with the sledgehammer than the quill. None of it should be
taken personally because the goal is, as Dr. Hendrickson has written, more
accurate modeling. I note that several modelers who have been quite candid
in expressing their opinions on some Tichy products have also commented on
(a) how beautifully they are produced: it's simply that some inaccuracies
have crept in the production process, and (b) how often they purchase and
build them. Cash on the barrelhead seems a good way to support a business.
It's simply that some would like that business to be even better than it
already is.

I am climbing off the soap box now.

Regards,
William Bryk

On 8/2/07, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com> wrote:

On Aug 2, 2007, at 4:30 PM, John Van Buekenhout wrote:

How long do we have to contend with these tactics or attacks against
Tichy?
Attacks? John, despite the recent posts on the subject, you seem
confused about the purpose of this list. It exists to share
information about prototype freight cars so that we can all build more
prototypically accurate models. To point out a model's errors and
shortcomings is a part of this process, it's not an "attack" on either
the model or its manufacturer. In the case of the Tichy tank car
models, it certainly isn't an attack on Tichy, who inherited the
tooling by purchasing the Gould line from Bill Gould. As several list
members have pointed out, the Gould/Tichy tank cars are superbly
designed and engineered models, maybe the best craftsman styrene
freight car models ever produced. But the fact is that they represent
a prototype car which, though designed for the United States Railway
Administration during World War I, was never built, either by the USRA
or anyone else. Not even one car. That fact won't go away. Build a
Tichy tank car and you will have a fine model, but it will be totally
imaginary, prototypically incorrect - bogus, in short. How that came
to pass is ancient history, and I'm not going to dwell on it here.
Suffice it to say that it was the result partly of Bill Gould's
paranoia about letting anyone else in the hobby know what he was
working on until it the project was finished, compounded by bad advice
from a magazine editor/self-appointed expert who hadn't done his
homework and didn't know what he was talking about. A number of us who
heard rumors about the tank car project offered to help with the
prototype research and could have set Gould straight, but we were told
by Gould himself that he didn't need any help.

What you may wish to do with this information is your call. On your
model railroad you can run all the bogus freight cars you like, even
Tyco searchlight cars or stock cars with giraffe heads sticking out of
holes in the roof. But you are NOT entitled to complain on this list
when the bogosity of a prototypically incorrect model is pointed out.

While we're talking about Tichy, it's worth pointing out that the
freight car models Tichy has produced from their own tooling, though
nicely made and well detailed, often suffer from sloppy prototype
research. One example is the Georgia RR steel-side USRA box car
conversion, which has the wrong roof. Another example is the line of
"War Emergency" 52' composite mill gondolas; these are in many respects
very nice models, and I've built several of them myself, but the kits
are frustrating because right out of the box they provide a combination
of drop ends, hand brake equipment, trucks, and other details which is
not entirely correct for ANY of the prototype cars built to this
design. The errors are correctable, but only if you know what to
correct. And that's why this list exists. Getting it right is why
we're here. If that's not why you're here, maybe you've subscribed to
the wrong list.

Richard Hendrickson





Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

John Van Buekenhout wrote:
How long do we have to contend with these tactics or attacks against
Tichy? J.A. Van Buekenhout, CMA

Well I imagine Mike will answer your question since it seems to be directed
to him... But that said a more general reply:

Having read all the posts in this thread I must say I noted a few factual
statements about which prototypes were used in the creation of Tichy models
- those are well known as the general discussion seems to be repeated at
least once a year or so. Several warm endorsements of the craftsmanship of
the kits... and nothing at all I could understand as an attack, certanly no
idea what is meant by "these tactics". So it's not at all clear to me to
what you refer to when you write "these tactics" or "attacks". No quotes to
read or other explanation so there really isn't enough here to respond to in
any serious way.

Dave Nelson


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 2, 2007, at 4:30 PM, John Van Buekenhout wrote:

How long do we have to contend with these tactics or attacks against
Tichy?
Attacks? John, despite the recent posts on the subject, you seem
confused about the purpose of this list. It exists to share
information about prototype freight cars so that we can all build more
prototypically accurate models. To point out a model's errors and
shortcomings is a part of this process, it's not an "attack" on either
the model or its manufacturer. In the case of the Tichy tank car
models, it certainly isn't an attack on Tichy, who inherited the
tooling by purchasing the Gould line from Bill Gould. As several list
members have pointed out, the Gould/Tichy tank cars are superbly
designed and engineered models, maybe the best craftsman styrene
freight car models ever produced. But the fact is that they represent
a prototype car which, though designed for the United States Railway
Administration during World War I, was never built, either by the USRA
or anyone else. Not even one car. That fact won't go away. Build a
Tichy tank car and you will have a fine model, but it will be totally
imaginary, prototypically incorrect - bogus, in short. How that came
to pass is ancient history, and I'm not going to dwell on it here.
Suffice it to say that it was the result partly of Bill Gould's
paranoia about letting anyone else in the hobby know what he was
working on until it the project was finished, compounded by bad advice
from a magazine editor/self-appointed expert who hadn't done his
homework and didn't know what he was talking about. A number of us who
heard rumors about the tank car project offered to help with the
prototype research and could have set Gould straight, but we were told
by Gould himself that he didn't need any help.

What you may wish to do with this information is your call. On your
model railroad you can run all the bogus freight cars you like, even
Tyco searchlight cars or stock cars with giraffe heads sticking out of
holes in the roof.  But you are NOT entitled to complain on this list
when the bogosity of a prototypically incorrect model is pointed out.

While we're talking about Tichy, it's worth pointing out that the
freight car models Tichy has produced from their own tooling, though
nicely made and well detailed, often suffer from sloppy prototype
research. One example is the Georgia RR steel-side USRA box car
conversion, which has the wrong roof. Another example is the line of
"War Emergency" 52' composite mill gondolas; these are in many respects
very nice models, and I've built several of them myself, but the kits
are frustrating because right out of the box they provide a combination
of drop ends, hand brake equipment, trucks, and other details which is
not entirely correct for ANY of the prototype cars built to this
design. The errors are correctable, but only if you know what to
correct. And that's why this list exists. Getting it right is why
we're here. If that's not why you're here, maybe you've subscribed to
the wrong list.

Richard Hendrickson


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


Re: Freight Car Era question

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Bruce Smith wrote:
Freelancers are welcome here, but the assumption is that you're here to discuss prototype freight cars with which to populate your fantasy world. To use fantasy cars is your prerogative, of course, but it is irrelevant to this list (and if you ask us what we think, don't be shocked when we tell you!). If you want to model Mexican banditos, AT&SF Shock Control boxes in the 1930s, or Athearn 3 dome tanks, that's up to you, but none of those have any place in prototype modeling. IMHO, on THIS list, it is our DUTY to point out how to achieve the goals that were stated in the original post in a PROTOTYPIC FASHION.
As eloquently stated as I've seen it, Bruce. I'd recommend to Mike that this be included in the List Rules e-mail, or at least in the e-mail new members receive.
Though I was disappointed that Bruce forgot to include Stegosaurus switchers in his list <g>.

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


Re: ADMIN: A goal of the STMFC: Fidelity to the protype

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

John Van Buekenhout wrote:
How long do we have to contend with these tactics or attacks against Tichy?
Are you objecting to the accuracy of the comments, or to their mere existence? If the latter, I'd suggest you read the list rules again.

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

117161 - 117180 of 182076