Date   

Re: DS cars in grain service

armprem
 

To toss a match into the gas tank,why then did the Canadian roads rely on single sheathed car for their grain traffic? Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Storzek" <destorzek@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 2:41 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: DS cars in grain service


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

Good grief! I leave home for a couple of days and my observation that
granger railroads preferred double sheathed to single sheathed USRA box
cars prompted a largely irrelevant discussion of car distribution.
Obviously Malcolm's last sentence is correct. But the preference of
many RRs for double sheathed box cars had nothing to do with car
distribution. It was simply a conviction, whether correct or
incorrect, that double sheathed cars were more likely to remain
weatherproof in service, and thus usable for grain shipments.

Richard Hendrickson
Richard,

I, for one, believe your original premise, that the USRA intentionally
allocated DS cars to roads with a lot to grain traffic (how's that for
doing an end run around the "Granger road" debate :-), is flawed.
First off, as a gov't agency, it's hard to believe they had that kind
of clear thinking and foresight. Secondly, in the face of the national
emergency, they likely didn't have that kind of luxury anyway. Very
likely, groups of cars were assigned as they became available to plug
holes and put out brushfires in the car supply.

There are a couple of other factors that very likely had more bearing
on the decision other than the kind of sheathing; the DS cars were 40
ton capacity, while the SS cars were 50; and no one has offered any
info on the relative price of one against the other. Remember, even
though the USRA was having the cars built to their specs, the
railroads were expected to pay for them. Some roads objected
vehemently to being saddled with the cost of cars they didn't want or
felt they needed, and as Lane points out, there was a certain amount
of "horse trading" and shifting of allocations.

A better way to look at the question of which was thought to be the
better car for grain might be to see what the railroads themselves
were buying just prior to the creation of the USRA. If one goes back
just ten years previous, ALL the roads apparently felt that the DS car
was the best, as that was all that was being built. Swain and Clegg do
a good job of documenting the arguments raised against SS boxcars in
their seminal work on the development of the SS car in Canada by CPR
and DC&F, and subsequent research on the Fowler patents reveal the
designs implemented to allay those fears. By 1917 you have a situation
where CPR, Soo, C&NW at least had decided that the SS design could
make a workable grain car, while NP and GN still insisted on building
DS cars. As time went on after the roads were returned to private
control in the early twenties, it becomes obvious that the industry at
large accepted the SS car as adequate, even if there were a few hold-outs


Dennis





Yahoo! Groups Links



DS cars and USRA

Rupert & Maureen <gamlenz@...>
 

The CB&Q was allocated 500 DS box cars in 1918 although it had completely moved away from DS when it built its first SS box and automobile cars in 1913. The AC&F- built DS cars, numbered 120500-120999 and classed as XM-24, were the last DS ones acquired by the Q (other than the XM-27 DS cars in 1926 which were rebuilds of XM-15 with steel centre sills and ends, which in turn had been rebuilds in 1922 of XA-4 automobile cars originally built in 1910)

The allocation of DS cars at this time suggests that the USRA was out of touch with the individual roads preferences, at least in the case of the Burlington. (If I remember correctly, though, the CB&Q President - Charles Perkins - also had a senior role in the USRA.) It is surprising that the Car Committee (presumably railroad engineering experts) could come up with the designs but the allocation was so apparently flawed.

Rupert Gamlen
Auckland NZ


Re: What is a "granger railroad"?

teu6500
 

I believe the late David P. Morgan, editor of TRAINS magazine in the
1940s-1970s, coined the term "granger railroad," but I have no hard
evidence to support that statement.

Anybody else know?

Bob Edmonson
Maryland, near Wash. D.C.


Re: What is a granger railroad?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Andy Sperandeo wrote:
"Webster's Third New International Dictionary," in general an excellent reference on railroad-related terms, says simply that "granger" in our context means "a grain-carrying railroad."
Wow! That's going to make it easier to list the NON-granger railroads <g>. Obviously a whole bunch of transcontinentals became grangers in this definition, as well as possible surprises like SP (grain box cars on the SP are shown in my SP Freight Car volume 4).

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: What is a "granger railroad"?

Andy Sperandeo <asperandeo@...>
 

"Webster's Third New International Dictionary," in general an excellent
reference on railroad-related terms, says simply that "granger" in our
context means "a grain-carrying railroad." That's probably too simple to
resolve this controversy, but maybe it's the controversy that's too
complicated.

Have a good weekend,

Andy

Andy Sperandeo
Executive Editor
Model Railroader magazine
asperandeo@...
262-796-8776, ext. 461
FAX 262-796-1142


Re: DS in Grain Service

Malcolm Laughlin <mlaughlinnyc@...>
 

Posted by: "Thomas Baker" In interviews I have had with the operators of grain elevators on the old Chicago Great Western in Minnesota, I walked away with the impression that the grain elevators would have been happy with any clean car they could obtain, double-sheathed or not. One former grain elevator operator told me that much seemed dependent on how friendly one was with the conductor of the train. If the conductor was favorable, a clean car showed up from somewhere as soon as possible. If not, well, one waited. Perhaps this man was just spouting his resentment at his bad luck or fact.
=======================

That statement seems rather curious and provokes me to ask a few questions. How did the conductor know which car was really clean ? How many conductors opened box car doors so that they could pick a clean car for the friendly elevator operator ? When he was being paid on mileage, that was on his own time.


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


Re: Chateau Martin Wine Cars

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Richard,

Thanks much. There were (probably still are) several large bulk wineries on the Tidewater Southern (now UP). So I based on what you say, Chateau Martin wine cars might have been regular visitors. Any such cars would have been turned over to the WP at Stockton and would likely have gone east via the WP/D&RGW/CB&Q. I've never seen a photo of a Chateau Martin car on the WP, but there are still lots of surprises to be found there.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

On Aug 31, 2007, at 4:38 AM, Garth G. Groff wrote:


Did the TS serve a Chateau Martin winery?
I'm not aware that CM owned a winery in Tidewater Southern territory, but it wouldn't have mattered. CM bought cheap wines in bulk wherever they could get them, shipped them east, and bottled them under their own label for sale to those who were interested in what the Brits call "plonk." Premium wines from California, which are now recognized as world class, were not, at that time, widely distributed in other parts of the country, and in any case were notably absent from CM's marketing plan.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: DS cars in grain service

Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

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

Good grief! I leave home for a couple of days and my observation that
granger railroads preferred double sheathed to single sheathed USRA box
cars prompted a largely irrelevant discussion of car distribution.
Obviously Malcolm's last sentence is correct. But the preference of
many RRs for double sheathed box cars had nothing to do with car
distribution. It was simply a conviction, whether correct or
incorrect, that double sheathed cars were more likely to remain
weatherproof in service, and thus usable for grain shipments.

Richard Hendrickson
Richard,

I, for one, believe your original premise, that the USRA intentionally
allocated DS cars to roads with a lot to grain traffic (how's that for
doing an end run around the "Granger road" debate :-), is flawed.
First off, as a gov't agency, it's hard to believe they had that kind
of clear thinking and foresight. Secondly, in the face of the national
emergency, they likely didn't have that kind of luxury anyway. Very
likely, groups of cars were assigned as they became available to plug
holes and put out brushfires in the car supply.

There are a couple of other factors that very likely had more bearing
on the decision other than the kind of sheathing; the DS cars were 40
ton capacity, while the SS cars were 50; and no one has offered any
info on the relative price of one against the other. Remember, even
though the USRA was having the cars built to their specs, the
railroads were expected to pay for them. Some roads objected
vehemently to being saddled with the cost of cars they didn't want or
felt they needed, and as Lane points out, there was a certain amount
of "horse trading" and shifting of allocations.

A better way to look at the question of which was thought to be the
better car for grain might be to see what the railroads themselves
were buying just prior to the creation of the USRA. If one goes back
just ten years previous, ALL the roads apparently felt that the DS car
was the best, as that was all that was being built. Swain and Clegg do
a good job of documenting the arguments raised against SS boxcars in
their seminal work on the development of the SS car in Canada by CPR
and DC&F, and subsequent research on the Fowler patents reveal the
designs implemented to allay those fears. By 1917 you have a situation
where CPR, Soo, C&NW at least had decided that the SS design could
make a workable grain car, while NP and GN still insisted on building
DS cars. As time went on after the roads were returned to private
control in the early twenties, it becomes obvious that the industry at
large accepted the SS car as adequate, even if there were a few hold-outs


Dennis


Re: DS in Grain Service

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
I'n not sure what RRs or time periods Russ is generalizing (over-generalizing?) about here, but in the late 1940s and early 1950s, when I spent a lot of time hanging around the Santa Fe and Southern Pacific in California, every agent, even at small stations, had a current copy of the ORER and used it. I well remember the agent at Oceanside walking the yard every morning, clip board in hand, and consulting the ORER in his office, if he needed to, regarding any of the cars in the yard, especially cars in assigned service (e.g. U.S. Navy ammunition cars) which had to be returned to their point of origin.
Any agent I ever talked from the pre-1960 period was entirely familiar with ORERs and worked with them daily. I asked one if he saved any copies, and he said he was always happy when a new one arrived, as the previous one would be so worn and tattered by then.
Russ was perhaps stating the situation in the 1970s, by which time many smaller agencies were closed on most railroads, and as the ORER print run fell, prices may have risen in response, making the ORER copy an expensive item. It did not seem to be so in the 1950s.

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: Chateau Martin Wine Cars

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 31, 2007, at 4:38 AM, Garth G. Groff wrote:

Did the TS serve a Chateau Martin winery?
I'm not aware that CM owned a winery in Tidewater Southern territory,
but it wouldn't have mattered. CM bought cheap wines in bulk wherever
they could get them, shipped them east, and bottled them under their
own label for sale to those who were interested in what the Brits call
"plonk." Premium wines from California, which are now recognized as
world class, were not, at that time, widely distributed in other parts
of the country, and in any case were notably absent from CM's marketing
plan.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Help identifying cars

nyc1956 <kmetz1@...>
 

The .ppt file is a MicroSoft PowerPoint file. If you don't have the
Powerpoint program on your computer you can download a free
Powerpoint viewer from the Microsoft web site.

The .pdf (portable document) file requires a free downloadable viewer
from Adobe's web site.
--Mike

--- In STMFC@..., Dan Gledhill <gledhilldan@...> wrote:

Hello Rob,
Went to your newly posted files but was unable to open
them.What program would work best for this.My computer is set up with
Milleneum 2000 .
Dan W.Gledhill

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...> wrote:
Rob Kirkham wrote:
"I've posted a one page power point presentation to the files
section this evening titled "details @ Heatley St. Aug 6 1945.ppt"

Rob, I've uploaded a PDF of your slide to the files section with
annotated comments and links. The file name is "details @ Heatley
St.
Aug 6 1945 (Hom review).pdf"

Ben Hom






---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.



Re: DS in Grain Service

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 30, 2007, at 4:44 PM, Russ Strodtz wrote:

Basic problem there is they (ORERS) were expensive and most
roads did not provide them to very many Agencies or
Yard Offices. There would probably be a copy in a
large billing department but nobody there was checking
any cars or dispositioning any empties.
I'n not sure what RRs or time periods Russ is generalizing
(over-generalizing?) about here, but in the late 1940s and early 1950s,
when I spent a lot of time hanging around the Santa Fe and Southern
Pacific in California, every agent, even at small stations, had a
current copy of the ORER and used it. I well remember the agent at
Oceanside walking the yard every morning, clip board in hand, and
consulting the ORER in his office, if he needed to, regarding any of
the cars in the yard, especially cars in assigned service (e.g. U.S.
Navy ammunition cars) which had to be returned to their point of
origin.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: What is a "granger railroad"?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 30, 2007, at 8:25 AM, Malcolm Laughlin wrote:

If you review a lot of the literature I believe you will find that the
term “granger” roads was applied to railroads that had most of their
trackage in that area of IL, MO, KA, NE, IA, WI, MN, SD, ND. I would
not say that a railroad that had most of its trackage elsewhere was a
granger road.

By the those criteria, here’s how they fall.

Definte granger roads. CB&Q, CMO, CNW, MILW, RI, SOO, CGW, M&StL,
GM&O (C&A)

Marginal granger KO&G, M-K-T, MV, TP&W, IC, SLSF

Not granger roads. ATSF, FW&D, GN, KCS, MP, NP, T&P, UP, C&S, GM&O
(GM&N)
Any criteria which render RRs like the Santa Fe, Great Northern, and
Northern Pacific non-granger RRs are obviously false and misleading.
All three railroads handled vast amounts of agricultural traffic,
especially grain shipments, from the regions along their routes that
were east of the Rocky Mountains. The fact that they had main lines
extending to the Pacific Coast is, in the context of this discussion,
irrelevant. How does the MILW, which also had a main line to the
Pacific Coast, qualify as a granger RR but not the GN and NP? And the
Santa Fe transported far more grain and other agricultural products
than, for example, the CGW, M&StL, or Alton. A granger railroad was
any railroad that hauled large amounts of grain and other ag products
from the states between the Mississippi River and the Front Range.
Never mind where else it went or what other sources of traffic it had.
Any other definition renders the term meaningless.

Richard Hendrickson


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


Re: DS cars in grain service

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 29, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Malcolm Laughlin wrote:

In all my times of association with the car distribution process, I
don't recall ever seeing an order that said anything about type of
sheathing. That was not part of the readily available information
about a car. If it's40 ft. box with no leaks in the roof, sides or
floor, no visible contamination (e.g.grease,oil) and it has six foot
doors, it's a grain car.
Good grief! I leave home for a couple of days and my observation that
granger railroads preferred double sheathed to single sheathed USRA box
cars prompted a largely irrelevant discussion of car distribution.
Obviously Malcolm's last sentence is correct. But the preference of
many RRs for double sheathed box cars had nothing to do with car
distribution. It was simply a conviction, whether correct or
incorrect, that double sheathed cars were more likely to remain
weatherproof in service, and thus usable for grain shipments.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: What is a "granger railroad"?

Shawn Beckert
 

Ted wrote:

You kicked out SSW, which is OK; but then I would
think KCS would also be out. And Frisco is a real
question running into Texas. OK and Kansas, but also
into the deep South (Florida)
SSW a.k.a. the Cotton Belt had most of its territory in
Southeast Missouri, Arkansas and Texas. IIRC the main
agricultural products were rice, beans, milo, and of
course cotton.

Somehow I don't think any of the above would qualify
it as a "granger" road.

Shawn Beckert


Re: What is a "granger railroad"?

Ted Schnepf
 

Hi Larry,

You have raised an interesting classification.

I would think MSTL is a clear granger running in Iowa, Minn and northern Ill.

You kicked out SSW, which is OK; but then I would think KCS would also be out. And Frisco is a real question running into Texas. OK and Kansas, but also into the deep South (Florida).

You should get lots of suggestions on this question.

Ted

At 09:25 PM 8/29/2007, you wrote:

Hi Folks
The M&STL, IC, and Cotton
Belt were also mentioned, but with some dubiousness.

Here is my tentative list of granger RRs (U.S. only). What do you
think should be added? What should be removed?

FW&D
GN
KCS
KO&G
MILW
M-K-T
MP
MV
SLSF
SOO
T&P
UP

Thanks,
Larry Ostresh
Laramie, Wyoming
Rails Unlimited
Ted Schnepf
railsunl@...
847-697-5353 or 5366
126 Will Scarlet
Elgin, Ill. 60120
http://RailsUnlimited.ribbonrail.com/

Model Railroad Sales and Service with
a personal touch.
Books new and used. HO and O scales.
DCC supplies. O scale urethane cars.
Photos and darkroom services.
Checks, cash (0%) or credit (secure server at web site 4% added).


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/981 - Release Date: 8/31/2007 6:13 AM


Westerfield box cars for sale

Michael McCaffery <mrr@...>
 

I have two remaining Westerfield kits that I am offering for sale to
help in my transition to Sn3.

They are:

Westerfield 1701 B-50-1 Southern Pacific
and
Westerfield 3311 USRA single sheathed Milwaukee

I'm asking $25 each plus $5 shipping, and will consider any reasonable
offer.

Please contact me off-list only at mrr@...
<mailto:mrr@...> .

Michael McCaffery
Bend OR


Re: Help identifying cars

Dan Gledhill
 

Hello Rob,
Went to your newly posted files but was unable to open them.What program would work best for this.My computer is set up with Milleneum 2000 .
Dan W.Gledhill

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...> wrote:
Rob Kirkham wrote:
"I've posted a one page power point presentation to the files
section this evening titled "details @ Heatley St. Aug 6 1945.ppt"

Rob, I've uploaded a PDF of your slide to the files section with
annotated comments and links. The file name is "details @ Heatley St.
Aug 6 1945 (Hom review).pdf"

Ben Hom






---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.


Re: Tahoe trucks, (WAS Detail part wish list?)

Andy Sperandeo <asperandeo@...>
 

Dean Payne wrote: "I'm happy to have the Tahoe Model Works trucks (Dalman
and arch bar), and I
wonder what they'll do next."

Bettendorf swing-motion caboose trucks, just what we've always needed for
Santa Fe's AC&F-built steel way cars. They've been out for a couple months
now.

So long,

Andy


Andy Sperandeo
Executive Editor
Model Railroader magazine
asperandeo@...
262-796-8776, ext. 461
FAX 262-796-1142


Re: Gun Barrels - Paint question

Bruce Smith
 

John says:

So, let's say we had a tube going back east, and it had been on a ship carrying
a Measure 22 camo scheme, and we're going to model that.
A quick check of the navy Battleship camouflage database shows some interesting possibilities http://www.shipcamouflage.com/usn_bb.htm
Since we're talking about 16" 50 cal Mark 7s, then we can focus on the Iowa class (Note that I am using a 1/96th scale Mark 7 to stand in for a 14" 45 cal gun from the Pennsylvania as well)

1943 1944 1945
61 Iowa MS 22 MS 32a/1b MS 22
62 New Jersey MS 21 MS 21 MS 22
63 Missouri MS 32/22d MS 22
64 Wisconsin MS 22 MS 22

In order to decide what barrels come from where, painted in what camo measure, it is necessary to know where these ships are <G>
Iowa - Atlantic fleet 1942-43, Pacific fleet 1944-1949(mothballed)
New Jersey - Atlantic fleet 1943, Pacific fleet 1944-46, Atlantic Fleet 1947
Missouri - Atlantic fleet 1944, Pacific fleet 1945-1955(mothballed)
Wisconsin - Atlantic fleet April-September 1944, Pacific fleet September 1944-1945, Atlantic fleet 1946-1948(mothballed).

The top of the barrel would be the same dark blue as the "Deck Blue", and the
bottom of the barrel would be the appropriate intermediate/haze gray blue.
(I don't have my FS numbers in front of me.)
Deck blue was 20-B and haze grey was 5-H.

Measure 21 was all navy blue (5-N) and Measure 32 was a pattern of light grey (5-O), ocean grey (5-L) and black.

My question; The barrels pass through a boot upon entering the turret ---
at what point "up the barrel" from the breech would the camo paint start?
Look at:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h90000/h90624.jpg
The boots are secured to the 4th segment but seem to come to midway on the 3rd segment from the muzzle. Looks like I'm going to need to repaint the breech end of my Measure 21 barrels!


In the turret, I would imagine, from B&W photos I've seen, that the breech
end of the barrel would have been painted an interior gray, or maybe even
monkey vomit green, or not painted at all?
Check out these photos
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/k00001/k00513.jpg
A new barrel - Green and Yellow???? I think this is in part due to grease... but this isn't the weathered black I painted mine <G>.
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/k00001/k00515.jpg
New barrels, rust and black. Notice where the turret is on these.

The breach mechanism was probably painted interior grey, but that would be left behind when the barrel was pulled. I'm guessing that it was either raw metal, rust or primer. If the last, it would be severely weathered by heat of firing.

I just thought I'd breech this subject ------
OUCH!

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/index.pl/bruce_f._smith2

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."
__
/ &#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

129581 - 129600 of 195525