Date   

Re: Brake Diagram for WW2 Pullman Troop Sleeper

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Marty, I didn't quite catch this message of yours yesterday, but, forgive me, but I think you're
being a bit silly. If "someone else" were to go to a good library, or their model railroad club's
library, and take a magazine to the copier to copy it "for their own use" that is legal.

So where does it come to pass that giving someone >>A<< copy for their own use is a problem? That
certainly does not constitute "publication." I mean, I don't condone wholesale copying of an
article and handing it out willy-nilly to anybody who happens by, or worse, selling those copies,
but a single copy to one other person?

SGL


Marty and list;

Marty, you're absolutely right on that, and in fact as I went out
yesterday evening I was thinking just that - "You can't do that..."

Oh well, lesson learned, no harm, no foul... Thanks for the gentle
reminder, though!

Jim Harr
Stella Scale Models
www.stellascalemodels.com

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> , "cvsne" <mjmcguirk@...> wrote:


More bad news Jim, you cannot send a photocopy of the
article/drawings
to someone else. I don't think the police will come knocking, but I
should remind you of that. Photocopies (or perhaps back issues) are
available directly from the nice folks at Kalmbach Publishing.

Marty



Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Schuyler Larrabee
 

I never have liked those 8s. They're a variation on the idea of the 4, but have conceded that the
width of the standard Kadee box is "good enough, everybody else is using it," the concede the issue
of having to screw attach the "box" to the car, and I don't like the back end of the box being open,
letting dirt and crud get in there (no I have no evidence of crud accumulation, but it just seems
like, well . . . never mind).

I have used 4s in recent history, for the sake of the slack action Denny mentions.

But as to the question "re-asked" this morning: one thing that would have to be considered in trying
to calculate (as opposed to the empirical method someone advocated) the minimum width for a specific
radius is that at sharp curves, the pivot point-to-pivot point connection will not necessarily be a
straight line like a drawbar. The couplers themselves have some ability to work with each other at
an angle, maybe up to ten degrees? Guessing there. Meaning that with the two shanks hard up
against the side of the box, the two couplers could remain coupled without derailing the cars,
because the two couplers' shanks would not have to be aligned with each other. How much that angle
could be without locking up the two couplers (if indeed that's what would happen) is another
variable (or limit, I suppose) in the calculation.

SGL


No, Denny is right, that's the one I was thinking of.

Some of my W&R brass freight cars have special cast-in
draft gear designed for one of the "weird" Kadee couplers
#6-#7-#8 ( http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page50.htm <http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page50.htm> ).
The
box has openings in the side for those 'wings' and as a
result is closer to scale size than a conventional #5 box.

W&R tried to push the envelope... I have sprung trucks w/
10 springs (!) to a truck, arranged just like prototype.
(I know because I disassembled them for painting and only
then realized it.) They were made almost 20 years ago.

Tim O'Connor

At 2/25/2009 07:43 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
The #4 has a long slot in the shank just wide enough to fit over a
square post within its own cast metal dedicated coupler box.<

Denny,
I don't think this is the coupler that Tim is talking about. It's one
of the pre-magnetic ones I think. It had a slot in the back and a spring
was attached that applied the springing action. The spring was behind the
center pivot post. I'm pretty sure this was one of the first Kadees made.

Jon Miller



Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Tim O'Connor
 

No, Denny is right, that's the one I was thinking of.

Some of my W&R brass freight cars have special cast-in
draft gear designed for one of the "weird" Kadee couplers
#6-#7-#8 ( http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page50.htm ). The
box has openings in the side for those 'wings' and as a
result is closer to scale size than a conventional #5 box.

W&R tried to push the envelope... I have sprung trucks w/
10 springs (!) to a truck, arranged just like prototype.
(I know because I disassembled them for painting and only
then realized it.) They were made almost 20 years ago.

Tim O'Connor

At 2/25/2009 07:43 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
The #4 has a long slot in the shank just wide enough to fit over a
square post within its own cast metal dedicated coupler box.<

Denny,
I don't think this is the coupler that Tim is talking about. It's one
of the pre-magnetic ones I think. It had a slot in the back and a spring
was attached that applied the springing action. The spring was behind the
center pivot post. I'm pretty sure this was one of the first Kadees made.

Jon Miller


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

The #4 has a long slot in the shank just wide enough to fit over a
square post within its own cast metal dedicated coupler box.<

Denny,
I don't think this is the coupler that Tim is talking about. It's one of the pre-magnetic ones I think. It had a slot in the back and a spring was attached that applied the springing action. The spring was behind the center pivot post. I'm pretty sure this was one of the first Kadees made.

Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: drill bits (was Single-sheathed box cars)

Tim O'Connor
 

Jeff

I recently bought some drills from Drill Bit City, that
someone here recommended. I got a set of 10 drills #80
to #85 for $15 (incl shipping). They all have 1/8" shanks
and bright plastic collar labels. I mounted a #85 in an
ordinary MicroMark drill press and it drills beautifully,
making a hole that is a SNUG fit for .008 wire. Later on
I may go back and order even smaller drills, which are
much more expensive.

So even though I have a Brazelton precision drill press,
which I traditionally have used for tiny holes, I find I
can now drill them just as easily with the much cheaper
drill press. The large diameter shank makes them easy &
quick to insert.

I would definitely NOT try to drill holes this size with
a pin vise! That's a good way to break drill bits. I keep
a whole set of cheap labeled pin vises with drill & tap
bits for 00-90, 0-80, 2-56, etc holes.

Tim O'Connor

At 2/25/2009 03:00 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
Clark,

Do you do your drilling w/ a pin vice, or do you have some other technique to quickly drill those 36 holes?

Regards,

-Jeff


Re: Single-sheathed box cars

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

.....all of the holes I
drill in resin , I use a Dremel Mini-Mite. A battery powered moto-
tool.
If you're careful and use the right feed rate and speed you can also
successfully use this tool for styrene as well.
Drilling 36 holes becomes a job of mere minutes.
I will second that. Just don't try to use carbide bits this way,
however. You (meaning me, of course) cannot hold the tool steady
enough to avoid bit breakage.

The battery-powered Dremel tools are a godsend.

Denny


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

Didn't one of the really old Kadee couplers use
this technique -- a #4 perhaps? I'm pretty sure
one of them used a coil centering spring.<
Yes, and they are still available, and reportedly are still chosen by
a small set of modelers that very much like the "slack action" that
the #4's internal longitudinal springs allow. They are considerably
different in design and concept from the #78, and in this regard they
really have very little real relationship

The #4 has a long slot in the shank just wide enough to fit over a
square post within its own cast metal dedicated coupler box. With the
coupler shank over the post, the remaining portion of the slot is
filled with a tiny (that is- *tiny*) spring that holds the shank
against the post while at the same time pulling the shank back to
center when the coupler swivels. What is different is that the coupler
does not swivel against the post but swivels against cast-in columns
in the sides of the coupler box- as explained well by Dennis.

I still have a great number of cars equipped with #4s, and they
operate as well as could be expected, but test one's patience in
either repair or replacement. The couplers fit no other coupler
boxes, except a number of cast metal boxes common to a number of early
manufacturers in the '50s and '60s (MDC?). In contradistinction, none
of the usual standard couplers will fit the #4's box.

Denny


Re: NP lettering

leakinmywaders
 

Yes, paint code is how Rick Leach recently described the two-letter
suffix in this stencil to me, and he is the first person I've asked
that knew. The numerals indicate a paint or repaint date.

Chris Frissell
Polson,MT

Polson, MT --- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Phillips, III, J.A."
<whstlpnk@...> wrote:

RW-

I'd send a note to Rick Leach on the NPTellTale. (He may be lurking
here.) Off the top of my head I believe that's the code for the paint
used, but I may be wrong.

JP3


Re: military equipment tie downs

Charles Hladik
 

Interesting off set of the deck above the grab.
Chuck Hladik

In a message dated 2/25/2009 11:45:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
timboconnor@comcast.net writes:




Nice illustrative view of loading/blocking practices
circa 1942
_http://tbn0.http://tbn0http://tbn0.<Whttp://tbn0.<WBRhttp://tbn_
(http://tbn0.google.com/hosted/images/c?q=ad7b5670c3b97b75_large)
Tim O'Connor





**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

Didn't one of the really old Kadee couplers use
this technique -- a #4 perhaps? I'm pretty sure
one of them used a coil centering spring.<

Yes, I forget the number.

Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Richard Townsend
 

Is that why Magor went out of business? They were having coupler
problems?<G>

Richard Townsend

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Karl Peters <krlpeters@...> wrote:

Currently, the bulk of the running fleet is 24' iron ore cars. The
rest is mostly 40', with a few 50'. With small steam {MA&PA sized} I
have not have any magor problems running


Re: Single-sheathed box cars

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Jeff Aley wrote:
Do you do your drilling w/ a pin vice . . .
Um, let's not get into vices on this list.

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: Single-sheathed box cars

pierreoliver2003 <pierre.oliver@...>
 

Jeff,
I'm going to jump in here and mention that for all of the holes I
drill in resin , I use a Dremel Mini-Mite. A battery powered moto-tool.
If you're careful and use the right feed rate and speed you can also
successfully use this tool for styrene as well.
Drilling 36 holes becomes a job of mere minutes.
Pierre Oliver

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Aley, Jeff A" <Jeff.A.Aley@...> wrote:

Clark,

Do you do your drilling w/ a pin vice, or do you have
some other technique to quickly drill those 36 holes?

Regards,

-Jeff


________________________________


Mianline Modeler back issues source

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,

A while back, I inquired about obtaining back issues of mainline Modeler magazine.

I got lots of good suggestions, and even an offer for a photocopy if I were unsuccessful in my search. I'd like to thank everyone who replied.

In the end, I went with the place at the url below. I found them to give efficient service. No connection, other than as a satisfied customer.

http://www.metaldetector.org.uk/MAGAZINE.htm

I know the url looks kinda funny, but it is a domestic business in the USA and I got my back issue quite quickly via online order and PayPal pmt. The mag was in like-new condition.

- Claus Schlund


Re: Single-sheathed box cars

Aley, Jeff A
 

Clark,

Do you do your drilling w/ a pin vice, or do you have some other technique to quickly drill those 36 holes?

Regards,

-Jeff


________________________________
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rockroll50401
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 5:41 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Single-sheathed box cars


Gene, I've built the Tichy kits and resin kits by most makers. The
Tichy cars take just as long to asemble as a resin kit. I built and
painted a Westerfield 29000 series M&StL kit today in about 5 hours.
(36 holes to drill) Beatiful model.
I'm not bragging or trying to give the impression that anyone should
built that fast. I'm just saying guys shouldn't just rule out resin
kits.
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Re: Texas Natural Gasoline Corp Tank Cars

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 25, 2009, at 1:22 AM, matthewjstrickland wrote:
Can anyone tell me if the "Texas Natural Gasoline Corporation" was the
same company as the Texas Company i.e Texaco?

Atlas have a 11,000 Tank Car for this road name, lettered as from
Tulsa, OKLAHOMA.

Is this car protypical?









Matt, the Texas Natural Gas Corporation did have its headquarters in
Tulsa and apparently had no connection with the Texas Co. In 1953
they owned and operated 50 11,000 gal. LPG cars, AAR class TPI, ICC
class ICC-105A-300-W which were numbered TNGX 100-500 in multiples of
ten (i.e., 100, 110, 120, etc.). I have a photo of TNGX 500 and it
was a post-WW-II AC&F car of the design modeled by Atlas, though
whether the model is correct in every detail could only be determined
by comparing it with the photo. In 1958 Texas Natural Gas apparently
bought someone else's tank car fleet, as their roster suddenly
expanded to more than 700 cars. I also have photos of some of those,
but they are of somewhat different design than the AC&F cars modeled
by Atlas.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Denny Anspach wrote

Jon Cagle's tank cars do not use the Kadee "whisker" couplers. They
use a standard #78 centered by a coil spring aligned with the shank
that is inset into a notch in the back end of the shank (this
application is unique (to my knowledge), and is very creative.
Didn't one of the really old Kadee couplers use
this technique -- a #4 perhaps? I'm pretty sure
one of them used a coil centering spring...

Tim O'
The Kadee No.4 used a coil spring in conjunction with a lug cast on
each side of the coupler shank for centering, the same as the 711 "Old
Time" coupler uses a coil spring in conjunction with two little pivot
pins. When the coupler head is swung to the side, it pivots on one or
the other of the lugs, which pulls the tail end of the shank toward
the open end of the box, compressing the spring. The spring trying to
regain its maximum length pushed both lugs against their stops, thus
moving the coupler back on center. It was a very nice system, but it
required features in the box that were different from what was
required for the X2-f horn hook, so it fell out of favor.

Kadee also used this system on their O scale couplers, and back when I
was fooling around with 1/4" AAR Finescale (which ultimately became
PROTO:48) I noticed that the O scale shank was just a bit under 1/4"
wide, so it would fit between scale center sills, although it wouldn't
swing but a degree or two. However, when I realized how oversize the
Kadee coupler head was, I didn't go any further. Years later John
Munson had an article in Mainline Modeler on building patterns for a
1/4" Finescale USRA boxcar and he used the same system. According to
the article, the cars coupled fine, but I have no idea what radius was
required.

Which is why I say that you could just glue the couplers solid in the
cars and they would work, between vars, at least. It's the different
geometry of locomotive coupler mounts that cause the problem.

Dennis


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Lucas" <stevelucas3@...> wrote:

Tim Warris' Bronx Terminal layout (an HO model of the railroad of the
same name) uses Kadee couplers AND approximate 12" radius around the
freight shed--

http://www.bronx-terminal.com/?p=1643

Steve Lucas.
Steve,

All that proves is that STANDARD Kadees in STANDARD width boxes will
work on this radius, SO LONG AS all the equipment has about the same
striker to kingpin dimension, which Tim's equipment does, as did the
prototype.

What the original poster is asking for is how narrow can you make the
box... and the answer is no one has ever done the work required to
survey the situation, because the answer will be different for every
different combination of locomotives and minimum radius.

I personally think the OP should get himself some snap track of known
radius, some shake-the-box cars, and the locos he intends to use, and
do the tests, narrowing the boxes on the cars (and maybe the loco, to)
by cementing blocks of styrene of known thickness into the mouth of
the wide boxes until the cars won't stay on the track any more. The,
he can tell us the answer.

Dennis


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Tim O'Connor
 

Denny Anspach wrote

Jon Cagle's tank cars do not use the Kadee "whisker" couplers. They
use a standard #78 centered by a coil spring aligned with the shank
that is inset into a notch in the back end of the shank (this
application is unique (to my knowledge), and is very creative.
Didn't one of the really old Kadee couplers use
this technique -- a #4 perhaps? I'm pretty sure
one of them used a coil centering spring...

Tim O'


Re: Kadee minimum body box widths

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

I started thinking about this when I noted Jon Cagle's Southern Car &
Foundry Standard tank cars have narrow boxes and use Kadee whiskers.
They probably can be coupled car to car on an 18" radius curve
because the distance from pivot to truck center is relatively short
to - say - a 40' AAR boxcar.

Jon Cagle's tank cars do not use the Kadee "whisker" couplers. They
use a standard #78 centered by a coil spring aligned with the shank
that is inset into a notch in the back end of the shank (this
application is unique (to my knowledge), and is very creative.

A standard "whisker" coupler would not likely fit in the same space
even if the whiskers were removed.

It is very important to recognize that Kadee's wire whiskers are
carefully engineered so as to allow positive centering while at the
same time allowing just enough easy radial movement of the coupler
within the box it was designed to operate in, e.g. the industry
standard Athearn/Kadee variety. If the coupler is jammed into ever
more narrow boxes, the resistance to radial movement is ever
increased to the an end point of no coupler movement at all. How does
one manually center a coupler that is in such a straight jacket?

The same observation can also be made for other makes of couplers with
integral self centering spring features. They are all designed to
operate within certain box widths, and cannot be expected to work as
well otherwise.



Denny

107381 - 107400 of 187144