Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
charles slater
Instruction videos are great, but Al does not make one for each kit produced. He did one which is a general instruction for all kits. Quit complaining and go build those kits that are piling up.
Charlie Slater To: STMFC@...: b.hom@...: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 18:11:32 +0000Subject: [STMFC] Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299 Charlie Slater wrote:"If detailed instructions are needed for these kits, these kits aretoo difficult for you to build."Guess Al Westerfield wasted his time doing those instructions and instructional videos all these years!Ben Hom _________________________________________________________________ Got Game? Win Prizes in the Windows Live Hotmail Mobile Summer Games Trivia Contest http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergames?ocid=TXT_TAGHM
|
|
Westerfield on-line catalogue (was: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299)
al_brown03
--- In STMFC@..., "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@...> wrote:
Speaking of which, I'm almost done building a Westerfield kit: not my first of his, but my first since Al put up his on-line catalogue. I can't say enough for the in-progress photographs. With a computer next to the workbench, full-size versions of the pictures displayed, even with middle-aged eyes I can see where 'most everything goes. Amazing stuff: thanks, Al! Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.
|
|
Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
charles slater
Now you know why Al does not produce anywhere the number of different kits that Martin does. If you want 2 or 3 kits a year we could spend a lot of OUR TIME writing instructions.
Charlie Slater To: STMFC@...: b.hom@...: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 18:11:32 +0000Subject: [STMFC] Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299 Charlie Slater wrote:"If detailed instructions are needed for these kits, these kits aretoo difficult for you to build."Guess Al Westerfield wasted his time doing those instructions and instructional videos all these years!Ben Hom _________________________________________________________________ Get Windows Live and get whatever you need, wherever you are. Start here. http://www.windowslive.com/default.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Home_082008
|
|
Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Charlie Slater, Patternmaker, wrote:
If detailed instructions are needed for these kits, these kits are too difficult for you to build.Nice one, Charlie. Guess no one can ever learn anything from instructions, but needs to know it up front. Might be useful to remember that not everyone knows where every little part goes on every prototype, nor is everyone a Patternmaker. 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: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Charlie Slater wrote:
"If detailed instructions are needed for these kits, these kits are too difficult for you to build." Guess Al Westerfield wasted his time doing those instructions and instructional videos all these years! Ben Hom
|
|
Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
charles slater
If detailed instructions are needed for these kits, these kits are too difficult for you to build. The construction of these kits has not changed over the years. You can take the instructions from a box car kit produced ten years ago and use them for todays kits. Usually a photo of the actual car is all that is needed.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Charlie Slater Patternmaker To: STMFC@...: cshope@...: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 17:08:25 -0500Subject: RE: [STMFC] Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
Better than no kits at all - keep the kits coming Martin, those of us onthis list should be able to handle the Instructions and fill in the gaps.Respectfully submitted,Charles D. Shope_____ From: cobrapsl@... [mailto:cobrapsl@...] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 5:01 PMTo: STMFC@...: Re: [STMFC] Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299Jerry Michel's saidIs there a reason Sunshine is producing minimalist instructions these days?Like the little bird in the tree-cheep, CHEEP, CHEEP!Paul LyonsLaguna Niguel, CA-----Original Message-----From: asychis@aol. <mailto:asychis%40aol.com> comTo: STMFC@yahoogroups. <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> comSent: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 1:58 pmSubject: [STMFC] Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299Hi,I'm completing Sunshine's MoPac 52'6" Fixed End gondolas and could use some photos. The Sunshine data sheet includes only one photo of the MoPac cars (actually one of the StLB&M cars), and does not show the "B"-end. Anyoneknow of a source? These cars also include I-GN 12000-12799 and StLB&M 11100-11599, 11650-11899. I also have to comment that the instructions are pretty skimpy.Why no photos of the completed kit and only a partial photo of theunderside? Is there a reason Sunshine is producing minimalist instructions these days?Thanks!Jerry Michels**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
_________________________________________________________________ Got Game? Win Prizes in the Windows Live Hotmail Mobile Summer Games Trivia Contest http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergames?ocid=TXT_TAGHM
|
|
Re: PRR FD2 [Was: Early Schnabel Cars]
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
PHIL MARCUS wrote:
The KCS built their own all welded hopper gondolas in 1932. They mounted them on the then new National B trucks. Innovative for a railroad.Phil, there were numerous experimental and prototype cars like this. I was speaking of larger scale commercial production. Probably the biggest contributor was Milwaukee Road with their own welded designs, although it is noteworthy that no one really copied them. 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: welded cars (was Re: PRR FD2 [Was: Early Schnabel Cars])
I thought at least one of the F30 subclasses was welded, not cast.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Not so? Tim O'
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> Tim Barney wrote:It was advanced for it's time, being all-welded when most cars (evenAs Bruce Smith observed, this comment about welding is way wrong.
|
|
Re: PRR FD2 [Was: Early Schnabel Cars]
Philip Marcus
The KCS built their own all welded hopper gondolas in 1932. They mounted them on the then new National B trucks. Innovative for a railroad.
Phil Marcus Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote: Tim Barney wrote: > It was advanced for it's time, being all-welded when most cars (even > of similar type) were > riveted construction. As Bruce Smith observed, this comment about welding is way wrong. The first extensively welded freight cars were covered hoppers in the mid-1930s. Because of all the welding done during WW II, it was a fully accepted construction method after the war. Freight cars, certainly by 1950, were being extensively welded, INCLUDING flat cars of several types (though maybe not so much on the PRR). Not to take anything away from the "Queen Mary," which was quite a project--just that welding isn't really part of its eminence. 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: (STMFC) Early Schnabel Cars
rfederle@...
Tom Daspit has a website the first US car was the WECX 200 August 6th 1957. A link to that page is below.
http://southern.railfan.net/schnabel/cars/ptdx200/wecx200_1.html Robert Federle
|
|
Re: PRR FD2 [Was: Early Schnabel Cars]
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Tim Barney wrote:
It was advanced for it's time, being all-welded when most cars (even of similar type) wereAs Bruce Smith observed, this comment about welding is way wrong. The first extensively welded freight cars were covered hoppers in the mid-1930s. Because of all the welding done during WW II, it was a fully accepted construction method after the war. Freight cars, certainly by 1950, were being extensively welded, INCLUDING flat cars of several types (though maybe not so much on the PRR). Not to take anything away from the "Queen Mary," which was quite a project--just that welding isn't really part of its eminence. 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: Aluminum-sheated box cars
rockroll50401 <cepropst@...>
Sunshine make a model of one style cars...Mt Vernon blt? Maybe
Mr.Hayes has the flyer up on his website? Clark Propst
|
|
Re: Aluminum-sheated box cars
water.kresse@...
The C&O built 5 alum hops and 10 alum box cars in 1948
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Al Kresse
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> Steve Lucas wrote: How common were these as postwar STMFC boxcars? I know of only a fewThere are a whole bunch, Steve, many of them singletons. 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
|
|
PRR FD2 was Re: Early Schnabel Cars
--- In STMFC@..., "John Thompson" <JThomp1945@...> wrote:On Aug 6, 2008, at 7:20 AM, tbarney2004 wrote: The PRR FD2 "Queen Mary" flat car was an all welded, 250T capacitySorry to nitpick but the 250Fxx tender classes generally had 3 axle trucks (with one exception that I know of). IIRC, the trucks on the FD2/FW1 were from scrapped T1 duplex locomotive tenders, class 180P84, truck class 4F5T3. Car was also unique in that the span bolsters had a secondAgain to nitpick, the well body was class FW1. http://prr.railfan.net/freight/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=FW1.gif&fr=cl AFAIK, has long been scrapped,I'll agree with the scale issue, but welding had been in use for freight car construction for over 15 years (e.g. D&H's 1932 AAR boxcars, built circa 1937). The jigs and oven that were used to build this car were pretty amazing, and when you consider that it was a one-of-a-kind, that was a significant expense to go to. 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." __ / \ __<+--+>________________\__/___ ________________________________ |- ______/ O O \_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ | | / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 \ | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__|| |/_____________________________\|_|________________________________| | O--O \0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0
|
|
Re: Early Schnabel Cars
Larry Kline
WECX 200 was the first US Schnabel car. It was built in June 1957 for the Westinghouse Transformer Div. by Greenville Steel Car Co. It was built because power transformers grew too large for depressed center flatcars as transmission voltages increased. The page in the link below includes an article from Modern Railroads and an article from the Erie RR employee magazine. (Scroll to the bottom) The Erie magazine article includes several photos of an O scale model.
There are drawings and 2 photos in the 1961 Car Builders Cyc. on pp 180-181. There is quite a bit of information on WECX 200 and later Schnabel cars at the PRRT&HS archives, including photos of a 1930s German car. The Archives are open for research when volunteers are working there. See: http://www.prrths.com/PRR_Research_page_two.htm Larry Kline Pittsburgh, PA Westinghouse employee from 1966 to 1996 Richard Brennan wrote: WECX 200 photos at: <http://southern.railfan.net/schnabel/cars/ptdx200/wecx200.html> The c1957 photo in the middle of the page look like the same shipment as in the book.
|
|
Re: Early Schnabel Cars
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
John Thompson wrote:
"The Berliner website includes the following reference, but it's not clear to me whether it's a Schnabel car or a heavy-duty flat car: -------------- Photo (and blowup detail) accompanying "Interview with Claire I. Clugh", KEYSTONE, Volume 29, Number 2, Summer 1996, Pages 14-15, PRRT&HS, FD2 #470245 in Apr 1952 (with Mr. Clugh and another in front for scale - WOW!). -------------- Does anyone have more information on this reference or on the first Schnabel cars in the US? Tim Barney replied: "The PRR FD2 "Queen Mary" flat car was an all welded, 250T capacity depressed-center heavy duty flat." In short, this is NOT a Schnabel car. Ben Hom
|
|
Re: Early Schnabel Cars
tbarney2004
--- In STMFC@..., "John Thompson" <JThomp1945@...> wrote:
The PRR FD2 "Queen Mary" flat car was an all welded, 250T capacity depressed-center heavy duty flat. Utilized 4, 4 axle trucks with span bolsters. Trucks were salvaged from scrapped 8 axle "long distance" steam locomotive tenders (250F classes - nominal 25k gallon water capy). Car was also unique in that the span bolsters had a second well-type body that could be swapped for the normal depressed center type car body. The well (class FW2), AFAIK, has long been scrapped, but the FD2 itself survives at the Railroader's Memorial Museum in Altoona, the city where it was originally built. It was advanced for it's time, being all-welded when most cars (even of similar type) were riveted construction. I believe the article you reference makes note of that fact, as well as the huge amounts of material used (car itself tops just over 500,000lbs empty itself) and the unique challenges faced by a workforce who had never previously constructed a fully welded car, especially, of this scale. Tim Barney
|
|
Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
jerryglow2
I cobbled it up the best I could when building mine:
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/modeling/StLBM_gon.html Jerry Glow --- In STMFC@..., <tmolsen@...> wrote: extension kit to his early MoP kits is shown on Page 219 (Figure 225) of the 1940 Car Builders Cyclopedia. and looks to be mounted close to the car end center, just to the right of the retainer valve. No side or end ladders, all grab irons.
|
|
Re: COAL TRAFFIC
Eric Hansmann
Malcolm Laughlin sent:
NEED SOME MODELING DATA:1950-1956 NORTHEAST USA(PENNA-NY) Coal for the steel mills of Buffalo out of coal county(WvA/Va/ Ohio/Ky)would have moved in whose coal cars other then PRR ============ PRR was not at all dominant in Buffalo. The largest line connecting the bituminous coal fields with Buffalo was the NYC. It was a secondary main line point for PRR, ERIE and B&O. Although also served by coal roads LV and DL&W, they did not handle much, if any, bituminous. The nearest large coal area to Buffalo was the Clearfield district. It was served primarily by NYC and PRR. ERIE and B&O also had a few lines in that area and served mines further west in PA. ========================================= Malcolm brings up some interesting information. I grew up in a neighboring coal field in Indiana, PA, and discovered the Buffalo Rochester & Pittsburgh Railroad at an erly age. This line was originally built by the Rochester & Pittsburgh Coal Company to move the black diamonds from the Indiana and Jefferson county coal fields. These are just west of the Clearfield district field. The BR&P moved quite a bit of coal north towards Buffalo, but I think much was sent to the docks for Canadian export. The BR&P was merged into the B&O in 1933. That coal traffic continued into the B&O years, but I do not know when it tapered off after the steam era. So while the coal from the B&O may not have been delivered to the Buffalo mills with frequency, it was a part of the coal traffic moving through that city. As an addenum to Malcolm's NYC details, the Cambria & Indiana connected with the NYC (at Manver or Mentcle, PA, I think). Coal from mines served by the C&I in central Cambria county may have gone north over the NYC in C&I hoppers. Eric Hansmann Morgantown, W. Va.
|
|
Re: Sunshine MoPac Gondolas 5200-5299
asychis@...
Jim,
Your list is wonderful. I use it often. Is there any way I could help you get scans done? I have a complete suite of scanners and the software to get them ready to post. If I can help, contact me off-list. As to your question about MP or MoPac, I think both are acceptable although MP is the proper reporting mark. I think being consistent is the main thing. Jerry **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
|
|