I guess you can do just about anything if you have a big enough hammer.

KL

On Feb 26, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Kurt Laughlin wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hendrickson
The three compartment car appears to have been a 6,000 gal
single compartment car converted to three compartments. Such
conversions were fairly common (more often, though, on 8,000 gal.
cars), especially on GATX cars.
----- Original Message -----

How would they do that? I suppose they could take off the heads and
slide
the new ones inside the shell, but my guess is that the inside was
far from
a perfect cylinder which would make "sliding" heads in and getting
a good
circumferetial seal very difficult.

Nevertheless, that's exactly how it was done, Kurt. I've sometimes
thought that they probably un-riveted the top seam, as well, since
they would have had to cut new openings for the end domes and bore
new holes for the dome flange rivets. But I've never found either a
photo or a witness's account of exactly how it was done.

Richard Hendrickson

The C&O in the 50s did stretch a lot of 40-ft into 50-ft boxes at their own Raceland shops and then brought back building most of their 70-ton hopper cars in their own shops.  They tried their hands at a few insulated boxes and covered hopper cars . . . . mostly to keep the vendors "competitive" and to keep their major rebuild shops filled up with work.  By the 60s they were buying kits from Thrall and finishing them in their Dubois shops.



Al Kresse

It is my experience that most drill failures are from mishandling, not poor drills, especially when you are drilling into plastic, wood, or resin. I pick mine up at a local hobby shop and have at least 3 of each in stock when I start a project. I've broken more by stupidly laying down the Dremel than anything else. #76-80 are my most used sizes.

----------------------------------------------------------------
J. Stephen (Steve) Sandifer
mailto:steve.sandifer@...
Home: 12027 Mulholland Dr., Meadows Place, TX 77477, 281-568-9918
Office: Southwest Central Church of Christ, 4011 W. Bellfort, Houston, TX
77025, 713-667-9417
Personal: http://www.geocities.com/stevesandifer2000/index
Church: http://www.swcentral.org

Hello,

All Pacific Fast Mail brass locomotives I purchased many years ago were
supplied with a plastic coupler box which was KD No.4 compatible.

As KD couplers (in those days) were metal, using the plastic coupler box
eliminated electrical shorts at the tender end of the locomotive. Therefore
it was the coupler/coupler box combination of choice on the tender of all
brass locomotives. Later the coupler box was available from Precision Scale
Co. as their part No. 31216. This is shown in the Walthers Catalogue for
1996 but is not in that for 2006. I still have a Vegemite jar full of PSC
boxes for possible future use.

I too like the slack action of a No.4 and use it on one end of most boxcars
and some reefers together with a No.8 on the other end. Generally I do not
use this combination on other freight cars due to the exposed holding
screws. However, I continue to install 4's and 8's together as I still have
a big stock of both. Many years ago a local hobby shop closed with much
stock obtained at reduced prices.

It is agreed that the No.4's are a bigger pain to install and more of a
maintenance problem than the others but when well under one per cent of all
my metal couplers have failured, I am not going to condemn them for that.

I prefer metal couplers to plastic and now use No.78 where the coupler box
is exposed.

Regards,

Glen Mills

Re: Kadee minimum body box widths
Posted by: "Denny Anspach" danspach@... docdenny34
Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:19 pm (PST)

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

I like the tie plates under the chair legs. Looks like the end of that board has some wear too. Might not be the best of jobs though on a rainy wintery day (or night) though.

Nice shot.

Robert Federle
---- Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

The train is stopped. He's a model railroader looking for free
material for a scratchbuilt PRR double door round roof boxcar.
Ah the good old days of modeling.

George Courtney

Subject: [STMFC] Re:gondola question

Hello: the man riding in the gondola looks neat and clean. I

wonder if he

is
hooking a ride or is a railroad worker? He certainly doesn't

look too

industrious. Al Campbell
**************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)


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



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Denny,

Based on your and Pierre's comments on the MiniMate, I plan to buy one soon. I usually buy my drill bits from Micro-Mark, who advertise them as "high speed steel." Are these good to use in the MiniMate? Any other suggestions for drill bits? Many thanks.

Jim Brewer
Glenwood MD

The multiple posts are happening on a fair number of Yahoo*!* Groups, not
necessarily just this one, and it is not limited to Earthlink clients. The
problem likely lies moreso within Groups than any other place.
--
jerry
<jmlaboda@...>

Passenger Car Photo Index - UPDATED 12/14/08 WITH OVER 6250 NEW LINKS
ADDED!!!
<http://trainweb.org/passengercars/>

Appreciate Freedom??? Thank a Veteran!!!

Regarding the photo of that Kopper''s coke distributing yard, would someone please identify the construction on the end of the hopper bin building?. There's clearly a rail hopper car delivering coke off to the right, presumably dumping into an in-ground receptacle that feeds the inclined bucket delivery belt up to the top of the hopper bins. But what's that other scaffolding and business also visible on the right end of the structure?

On Feb 26, 2009, at 4:26 AM, Ned Carey wrote:

what is the odd device on the end of this tank car?
http://tbn0.google.com/hosted/images/c?q=eb8dfb80ba8b6c72_large

Tim O'Connor

As Frank Fertitta observed, it's some sort of unusually large
cleanout cover with some sort of small crane arrangement to support
it when unbolted from the tank end. What Carnegie-Illinois Steel
might have been carrying in the cars that required a cleanout hole
that large I can't imagine, but it's big enough to admit a workman.
Frank's wrong in his speculation that the car was a high pressure
tank car of some sort, however, as it was listed in the ORERs as AAR
class TM, not TP. CISX 2774 was one of ten cars numbered 2772-2781
which were of 12,650 gal. capacity, unusually large for that day
(Note that the tank is visibly bigger than that on the 10,000 gal.
GATX car to the left). These ten cars were used to carry a non-
regulatory commodity, as is evident both from the stenciling on the
tank and the absence of safety valves - they had only frangible disk
vents. I'd be interested to learn from someone familiar with the
process of producing steel (Tony?) what that commodity might have
been. At any rate, They were AC&F Type 21s built in early the 1920s,
and the tank cleanouts were probably added later. The dome platforms
were homemade and were certainly added later.

Ned then observes:

It confirms what most on this list already know

a.. There was quite a variety of tank cars in size shape a detail.
b.. Most tank cars were plain black
c.. Three compartment cars are smaller, common models like athearn
are way to large. Note the three compartment car in the upper right
of the photo. It is noticeably smaller that nearby cars. I don't
recall seeing a multi compartment car next to other tank cars and
the size difference is obvious by comparison. (perhaps also a
converted car as the end domes are smaller than the middle dome.)

All true. The three compartment car appears to have been a 6,000 gal
single compartment car converted to three compartments. Such
conversions were fairly common (more often, though, on 8,000 gal.
cars), especially on GATX cars. 6 K gal. three compartment cars are
among the more obvious car types that need to be modeled in HO scale
(Micro-Trains has recent produced one in N scale). And Ned is, of
course, right that the old Athearn/AHM models are so grotesquely
oversize that they can't even be used as reasonable stand-ins for any
prototype cars.

What is the age of the photo?

Ca. 1942. Thee are a couple of GATX cars in the photo with features
(rod tank tie-downs instead of straps, full-circle dome handrails,
that weren't adopted earlier than late 1941), and all of the CISX
tank cars were gone from the ORERs by mid-1943.

a.. I see no radial course cars
b.. I see many cars that appear welded with no obvious rivet lines

There's one radial-course car way off in the distance, but certainly
they're largely absent from this photo. On the other hand, none of
the cars that are close enough for details to be made out appear to
be welded (and I've done some fiddling in Photoshop to bring up the
details as much as possible).

Interesting details
a.. The platforms on the full platform cars seem heavy. Maybe the
platforms onsome of the plastic models aren't so crude after all.

b.. My perception (Which perhaps comes from the model world) is
that full platform cars were much more common on insulated cars.
Yet I see a high percentage on non insulated cars in this photo.

Well, as noted earlier, the platforms on the cars close to the camera
were homemade, and very crude, additions. Dome platforms supplied by
the tank car builders were much more delicate.

c.. Seeing a person in close proximity to the manway, I am
surprised how small the manways were. It must have been a squeeze
to get into a car.

Yup. Fat guys would have had difficulty getting in and - worse-
getting out.

d.. On the first track to the left, take note of the second car
that has a dome showing. It has a circular grab all the way around
the dome. I haven't noticed this before and yet it is on at least a
few cars in the photo.

Standard GATC practice starting ca. 1941 but not generally adopted by
AC&F, the only other significant tank car mfr. by that date. Most of
the non-CISX cars I can identify in the photo are GATC built and
probably GATC owned. It appears that CISX had some sort of leasing/
maintenance arrangement with GATC, because in the 1930s they leased
cars from Pennsylvania-Conley, a wholly owned GATC subsidiary, and
that would account for the preponderance of GATC cars in the photo.

e.. The car to the upper right of the diesel cab has lateral
running boards around the dome. I have seen this before and
probably needs to be modeled more frequently. I can't think of a
single model available that has this. Would this have been an
option tank car builders offered for standard designs or would this
have been a trademark of a particular builder or tank car owner?

Tank car builder's may have provided those as an option, though I
can't recall seeing a builder's photo that shows them. However,
owners often added them on cars in assigned service where elevated
loading and/or unloading facilities weren't available. At any rate,
adding them on a model is very simple, if you're modeling a prototype
that had them.

f.. Perhaps most interesting of all is again the second car (with a
dome showing, 3rd car if you include the partial car in front) in
the left most row ahs an odd arrangement of rivet lines. Could this
be a 5 course car?

Yes, an arrangement unique, AFAIK, to GATC cars built in the early
war years, perhaps because larger pieces of steel weren't available.
There was a single bottom sheet, two side sheets, and two top sheets
with a rivet seam down the center as on three horizontal course cars.

Some other observations, for what they're worth.

The car whose tank end shows at the bottom of the photo was either a
Standard Tank Car Co. or Pennsylvania Tank Car Co. product, as
evidenced by the tank band location (PTC tanks were made by STC; PTC,
whose plant was next door to STC's, made only their own underframes
and smaller components like ladders and dome walkways). The next car
in the string at the left of the photo was GATX 18285, a 10K gal. car
built in 1926-'27.

All in all, as Ned says, a very interesting photo, though it would be
a mistake to over-generalize from it about tank cars as a whole.

Richard Hendrickson

I'll bet not too many layouts have a guy sitting on
a chair next to the yard throat, ready to throw that
switch...

http://tbn0.google.com/hosted/images/c?q=63aa8efb7477cb32_large

It's a 1942 view of an SP yard -- note the three PRR
box cars on the far track, and the 50' single sheathed
box car.

It is a "slip-switch" he's manually operating. Not the usual
arrangement for a yard throat.
A nice find Tim.
Bob Witt

Yes, a double-slip. There were two of them at the throat of
the Taylor Yard classification bowl. There are several shots
of the yard in the Life collection.

Tim O'Connor

I know this is out of scope but can any suggest a resource where I can
find when the ICC required daytime headlight illumination. I think it
was between 1954 and 1956.

Thaks,

Bill McCoy
Jax, FL

I'm with you Steve. I've used a sewing machine foot pedal for more than 20 years. I can control the RPM from about 5 on up.

Jim Hayes
Portland Oregon

Steve Sandifer wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., Al Campbell wrote:

Hello Don and others. I very much remember as a child growing up in

Chelsea

MA in the late 40's and early 50's we would occasionally use coke.

Money

usually was a little tight at the time but we would use coke

sometimes because the

heat content was higher than coal. Coke was a little more

expensive than

coal

More expensive than bituminous coal or anthracite?

Any idea where the coke was made?

Where there regions where dealers sold both soft or hard coal for
home heating? I know industrial customers generally used soft coal in
areas where homeowners used anthracite.

Ed

In the pressure vessel business, that thing that supports the manway
flange would be called a 'davit'. Typically it's specified for any
flanges that are too heavy for one man to handle, which often means
100 lb or more.

Manway flanges were once as small as 16" or 18" nominal size, now are
normally 24", but workers are bigger now.

Ron Merrick


--- In STMFC@..., William Keene <wakeene@...> wrote:

Tim,

That is an ALCO switcher...oh... you mean that round thingy...

looks

like a bolted flange for a clean out hatch. Note that it has a

support

structure for when it is in the open position. Not sure what would

be

the load or why such a clean out procedure would be required.

Very

interesting none the less.

Cheers,
-- Bill Keene
Irvine, Ca


On Feb 25, 2009, at 9:55 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

what is the odd device on the end of this tank car?
http://tbn0.google.com/hosted/images/c?q=eb8dfb80ba8b6c72_large

Tim O'Connor

Over the last week I have received multiple copies of a few Email messages coming through my server Earthlink. The messages all come from Yahoo Groups and all but one is a member of the STMFC. Earthlink is researching the source code of the messages in order to determine the cause. In support of that, I would like to ask if anyone else has received multiple messages. If so, please let me know but OFF GROUP at:

brockm@....

Thanks.

Mike Brock
STMFC Owner

--- In STMFC@..., "Gene Green" <bierglaeser@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "pierreoliver2003" <pierre.oliver@>
wrote:

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

Interesting. My son uses a similar technique. He regulates the speed
by choosing batteries already run down by the appropriate amount.
Gene Green

Gene: I had a friend in the eighties who would regulate the speed of
his Dremel by wiring light bulb sockets in series with the tool. By
screwing in different sized bulbs he could get different speeds. Yes I
know that's doing it the hard way but that was the sort of fellow he was.

Stephan Parachuk
Toronto