UP Frt Conductor Book Data...a quick look
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
A quick look at the UP Freight conductor's book that I recently acquired...thanks to Jeff Aley bringing it to my attention...shows some interesting stuff. First, the book contains data on 35 UP trains between Laramie and Rawlins [ to the west ], WY, over about a month and a half...Mar 6 to April 22, 1949.
As I have always maintained, every frt car...or one of its class...crossed Sherman Hill at least once in its life. This book seems to prove that out. The variety of RRs is impressive...not unexpected for a trunk line like UP in Wyoming I suppose. One train of particular interest is one carrying only ore. I cannot actually tell if the ore carrying cars are in only one train or part of another...given the structure of the book. Anyhow, the ore carrying cars are all box cars. Perhaps most surprising is that none are UP. Roads included are SLSF, NH [ NH?], IC, NYC, CN, NP, L&N, Milw, MP, ATSF, Q, RI, NKP, KCS, CNW, SAL, and Sou and that's from a string of only 26 cars. I have not dertimined destination completely. LA-4 and SP-1 are mentioned frequently, as are numbers 2,3,5, & 6. The ore string of cars is going to Van 6. These destinations are not stations since 3 would be that for Omaha and the referenced train is westbound. Commodities are listed fairly well. For instance there are loads of wine, oil, and gasoline and associated tank cars. One strange load is milk in ATSF 6970...a box car. Naturally I had to check for the elusive N&W hopper....I can feel the crowd grow tense, sudden silence in anticipation. Here's a list of coal or coke carrying cars included in trains I've checked...about half of the 35 listed: Loads are coal unless indicated. 1. Pennsy gon G-29 359601 2. B&O gon 261628 3. MP gon 72363 4. Lackawanna gon 66057 5. NYC gon 631040 coke 6. Frisco hopper 86496 coke 7. MKT gon 41492 ***** WARNING WARNING WARNING 8. N&W gon 91097 9. N&W gon 100350 pitch Does this qualify me to win the cash prize...or bounty...offered [ or should be offered ] by certain westcoast frt car aficionados ? Well, technically, no. These are not hoppers. But, they were carrying coal. Now, if I can just figure out what destination 3 is. 10. Frisco gon 84100 11. MP gon 66850 12. MP hopper 59413 13. L&N hopper 65073 14. Lehigh Valley hopper 24613 15. Q ballast hopper 221662 16. Q comp gon 166948 17. NYC gon 711577 18. Q ballast hopper 221725 19. KCS hopper 29107 There were a few UP cars also listed as carrying coal. Note that these are all westbound except for NYC 711577. Also I expect to uncover empties coming back east. BTW, seldom are more than 2 coal carrying cars in the same train. Another perhaps oddity is a train of empties westbound consisting entirely of UP cars and Sinclair tank cars. Sinclair was/is about 7 miles east of Rawlins. I assume the train probably dropped the 60 or so Sinclair cars there. Mike Brock...more to come
|
|
random questions
ThisIsR@...
Good afternoon:
Is there a problem in getting models from Sunshine Models? I've heard it mentioned on other lists that it takes a very loonnggg time to receive models or catalogs from this company. Is there a particular detail parts company that is better at building steam-era super detail parts? More variety? At what point did carbuilders and railroads switch from wooden roofwalks to steel roofwalks? Thank you for your time! Richard Stallworth
|
|
Re: PRR turtleback cars
Benjamin Hom <bhom3@...>
Richard Stallworth asked:
"I have been told that PRR x31f(?) class boxcars-the turtlebacks never left home rails. Is this true?" No (by the way, X31f is the correct class). Here's another piece of photographic evidence: PRR 81417 (Ft. Worth, TX, 6/17/1962, Dick Kuelbs photo, RMJ Mar 95, p 23) These cars also made their way to several second-hand owners in the 1960s as well: T-SE 324 (Craig Bossler photo, RMJ Mar 95, p 16) AD&N 1805 (Richard Burg collection, RMJ Mar 95, p 23) Ben Hom
|
|
Re: PRR turtleback cars
Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
What happened to them after the war? Thank you.Released to general service: Per a conductors book in my posession, on 3/16/1948, PRR 81840 carried a load of common nails over Sherman Hill on it's way to Portland Ore. Dave Nelson
|
|
Re: PRR turtleback cars
Bill Schneider <branch@...>
I would highly doubt that they were confined to PRR rails after the war
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
since there's an 1947 photo that includes the end of one of these cars being switched in Mayfield yard (Scranton) on the O&W in Morning Sun's O&W book. This was reason enough for me to buy one of the Bowser cars! :>) Bill Schneider ThisIsR@aol.com wrote:
Good afternoon:
|
|
Re: Speaking of private car rosters
Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- Well, remember, Dave, all the OTHER carriers would have to agree, orWas that the case with the PFE? GATX? I don't know that it was a FAT payment, butDid the ICC have any regulatory authority over private car lines? Perhaps the dollar value of the mileage charge, but I thought nothing else (wasn't it the FRA who regulated safety features of any cars, public or private?). But I don't think this is something you can reason through. It isWell, yeah, it is safe to say R.R. mgmt was, ahem, less than visionary. I'm trying to understand if the reasoning in this particular issue was financial, legal, or intellectual, especially by the 50's as more and more specialized cars came into service and car pools can into use. Sounds like both you and Garth lean towards the later - correct? Dave Nelson
|
|
Re: Speaking of private car rosters
thompson@...
But wouldn't that fat mileage payment create an opportunity for theWell, remember, Dave, all the OTHER carriers would have to agree, or convince the ICC to permit it. I don't know that it was a FAT payment, but if so, the ICC would certainly have had an input. But I don't think this is something you can reason through. It is probably largely history, as Garth Groff observed, and I would concur. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history
|
|
Re: When the X's were added
Larry King <ab8180@...>
2-28-01
In 1911,MDT had a series of 40' reefers with MDTX initials; I think the number series was MDTX 30000 and up. From a picture in a 1911 Equip. Register the car looked to be the same design as in the 1919 Cyc(40'lgh.,Bettendorf u'frame,8- hinge doors 5' wide etc).In 1913 all MDT cars were transferred to NYC&HR and LS&MS reporting marks. When they went back to using the MDT marks in about 1924,the X was no longer used. LR King
|
|
PRR turtleback cars
ThisIsR@...
Good afternoon:
I have been told that PRR x31f(?) class boxcars-the turtlebacks never left home rails. Is this true? I was told they were designed for hauling jeeps during WW2. What happened to them after the war? Thank you. Richard Stallworth
|
|
Re: Speaking of private car rosters
Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
Dave,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I suspect we have economics and accidents of history to explain why tank cars and reefers (and to a lesser extent stock cars) were privately owned, but other car types were not. Most of these cars were (a) specialized, especially when fitted up for a particular industry or commodity, and (b) fairly low use compared to general freight cars. IIRC, most railroads were reluctant to invest in such specialized cars due to the lower dollar return. So much for the economics. As for history, Armour tried to corner the market on refrigerators at the turn of the century, and Standard Oil attempted the same with tank cars. These companies put considerable pressure on the railroads not to compete, or lose through routing of the monopoly-owned special cars. This kept railroads out of the game, and allowed other private players (or railroad-owned consortiums) to move into this niche when Armour and Standard Oil lost their monopolies. As for other car types, consider that Trailer Train, Railbox, and Railgon more or less did/do offer "private" fleets of cars for hire today. Of course, these ventures are owned by participating railroads, but the companies are managed independently. Kind regards, Garth G. Groff Dave & Libby Nelson wrote:
|
|
Re: Speaking of private car rosters
Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-----Original Message----- Dave Nelson asks:But wouldn't that fat mileage payment create an opportunity for theAs it appears it was a smart move to form all of the reefer and tank caraddressed this way regulated carrier to: a) avoid a capital investment on its books and the attendant approval process and b) provide the shareholders equal to or greater return (the greater return comes from non owning roads paying that mileage fee)? Or were the milage fees and per diem payments roughly equivalent? Dave Nelson
|
|
Re: Speaking of private car rosters
thompson@...
Dave Nelson asks:
As it appears it was a smart move to form all of the reefer and tank carDave, I think the specialized nature of tank car and reefer traffic had inhibited railroads from wanting to own very big fleets, so private owners tended to do the job, and got the attractive boost of the mileage payments instead of per diem. But this didn't and doesn't apply to "plain jane coal hoppers" or most any other car type. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history
|
|
Speaking of private car rosters
Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
As it appears it was a smart move to form all of the reefer and tank car
companies, why didn't other car types and commodities get addressed this way too? Fer instance, 50' boxcars with auto racks (or in later years, the autorack cars). Or plain jane coal hoppers running between Gary Indiana and the Pocohontas coal belts? Or any covered hopper? Or depressed flatcar? Superficially at least, it appears these situations are not far off of reefers from California -- loaded one way and returned empty. So why wasn't it done? ----------------------------------- Dave Nelson
|
|
Re: When the X's were added
thompson@...
Richard Hendrickson wrote:
SFRD, IC, NP, BAR, CN & CP reefers were obviously RR owned. ART, PFE,Don't know about the others, Richard, but I do know from extensive references in PFE correspondence on official matters that it was indeed considered privately owned. Yes, of course, two railroads owned all the stock, but it was NOT considered a subsidiary, any more than FGE was a "subsidiary" of PRR, L&N, etc., or REA was a "subsidiary" of its owning railroads. I'd bet that ART (which dates to the 19th century) is in that category too. And Fruit Growers was formed in 1920, prior to the "X" ruling, so it's indeed interesting that they conformed to the rule. Wonder if they had a choice? Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com (510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history
|
|
Re: When the X's were added
Richard Hendrickson
Byron Rose wrote:
OTOH, Union Refrigerator Transit Line used URTC into the 30s and thenGood point, Byron; I'd forgotten about URT's use of URTC in the 1920s. But the latest example I can find of a car with URTC reporting marks is 1930, so your conjecture about the change to URTX coinciding with GATC's acquisition of URT may well be correct. The ORERs are no help; in the 1920s and early 1930s many car owners, including URT, didn't show reporting marks (though I did turn up one interesting factoid, which is that as late as 1933 Cudahy showed their reporting marks as CRL, not CRLX). Richard H. Hendrickson Ashland, Oregon 97520
|
|
Another Intro
golden1014
Gentlemen,
I stole this good idea from Richard Stallworth (he's a buddy of mine and a fellow Seaboard modeler). Mike Brock invited me to the list and I'm happy to be here, and am excited to learn as much as I can from you experts. I recognize a lot of names from other lists and from books and magazines, and I'm excited to get to know you guys a little bit. Most of my railroad and modeling interests focus on the old Seaboard and Atlantic Coast Line RRs, but I enjoy learning things about almost all other railroads...even the Southern Pacific (Grin!). I model the SAL, ca. 1950, and am planning a small layout for my home here in Northern California. If you're interested, you can check out my interests at my PhotoPoint site (see the "tag" below). Thanks for the invite! Yours, Johnny Golden Checked out our PhotoPoint web site yet? Over 750 railroad pictures, documents, models and more have been uploaded since November. Just click here: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=1187026&Auth=false. --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
|
|
Re: (many things to save "cyber-postage")
Richard Hendrickson
Richard - Check the glossary section for some freight car terms at:I'll try to find time to do this, but it won't happen in the next week or two. Did URTX ever get Dreadnaught ended wood cars?No, but see below. ....Did they rebuild older all wood cars?Many URTX wood reefers were rebuilt beginning in the mid-1950s with 4-4 Dreadnaught ends and steel roofs, but they were much taller than the T-M models, among other things. When was their first all steel cars. (I think 1937....June, 1936, built by General American (who owned URT) with Pennsy style flat riveted steel roof and ends and four-hinge doors that had latch bars on each door half. And is there any prototype for the T-M steel reefer?Sure there is. And the moon is made of green cheese. The entire model is fictional, especially those absurd 2-2-2 (!) Dreadnaught ends. It was designed (as you correctly observe) to fit the same mold base as the other T-M house cars and to use as many existing parts as possible, so it's a mish-mash of components most of which weren't prototypically accurate for anything to begin with. In my kitbashing days, I puzzled for a long time over what, if anything, the steel reefer kit could be reworked into that would at least vaguely resemble a real freight car and never came up with an acceptable answer. Richard H. Hendrickson Ashland, Oregon 97520
|
|
Re: When the X's were added
Richard Hendrickson
Richard,Actually, a separate corporation in which many railroads owned stock: PRR, B&O, ACL, L&N, and Southern were among the major RRs that participated. Unlike PFE, SFRD, ART, and MDT, all of which (as Tony T. has pointed out) existed prior to 1910, Fruit Growers wasn't founded until 1922, so the "X" ruling applied to it. Richard H. Hendrickson Ashland, Oregon 97520
|
|
Re: When the X's were added
byronrose@...
OTOH, Union Refrigerator Transit Line used URTC into the 30s and then
changed to URTX. Could have had something to do with it's purchase by General American in 1930, but I believe URTC was in use well into the 30s. BSR On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:47:59 -0800 Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com> writes: ________________________________________________________________Were PFE and MDT considered railroad-owned? Or was it just thiswasn'tenforced? (PFE, MDT, and probably a few others that I can't recallowner GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
|
|
Re: When the X's were added
ibs4421@...
Richard,
FGEX was a subsidiary of the L&N, ACL, and some other southeastern roads I believe. Warren SFRD, IC, NP, BAR, CN & CP reefers were obviously RR owned. ART, PFE, MDT(& NRC) were apparently considered to be RR owned, as the companies were direct subsidiaries of WAB/MP, SP/UP and NYC. But some MDT-owned cars used "X" reporting marks: MERX (Merchants Rfr. Line) and ERDX (Eastern Refrigerator Despatch). On the other hand, New York Despatch Line, though wholly owned by Grand Trunk Western, used NYDX reporting marks until WW II, when the cars were finally re-lettered GTW. It may be that only a railroad lawyer could explain ARA/AAR policy about this - and then you wouldn't know whether to believe what he/she told you. Richard H. Hendrickson Ashland, Oregon 97520 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: STMFC-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|
|