Date   

Re: Interesting boat load

Tim O'Connor
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote

Leave it to Dennis to - finally - introduce some hard data into what
has become a lengthy discussion consisting almost entirely of blather
and speculation. Though the photos are undated, the reweigh date on
the CN idler flat closest to the camera was 7-44 and appears to have
been freshly applied.

In fact, the date may be sometime after April 1945. I figured
a boat movement this unusual must be documented, so I Googled
for news about boats in North Bay... The boat in this story
was purchased in Quebec City and moved to North Bay, in 1945.

http://www.ottertooth.com/Temagami/History/aubrey.htm

Tim O'Connor


Lackawanna hopper

David Smith
 

In image http://al-g.smugmug.com/photos/443589347_MXf5s-O.jpg, a photo
currently for sale on eBay (for the E F Loree steam locomotive pictured
therin), there is a partial view of a Lackawanna tripple hopper in which it
appears that all three discharge doors face in the same direction. There is
no car number visible. I am wondering if this is a distinctive feature of a
particular car class on the Lackawanna or if this is a more common geometry
of tripple hoppers.

Dave Smith

--
David L. Smith
Da Vinci Science Center
Allentown, PA
http://www.davinci-center.org

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was
listening, everything must be said again. -- Andre Gide


Re: Interesting boat load

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
Quite right; I overlooked those in the table in the ORER. Of course, though the Santa Fe wasn't exactly a near neighbor of the CN, Chicago was a lot closer to Quebec than the nearest SP connection (presumably Portland, OR).
The cars were free runners (need I remind you of the Gilbert- Nelson theory?) and in any case the car service rules were not in force during the war, as I understand it.

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: Interesting boat load

Bruce Smith
 

On Wed, March 4, 2009 6:09 pm, Andy Carlson wrote:




Hypothetically, the car
could have been loaded in somewhere, like say Boston, on the B&M and
then made its way north to Quebec and thence west to North Bay.

Andy says:
Again,what would the chance that 2 Canadian flat cars would be available
in Boston for use as idlers? The chance of an appropriate flat car (Santa
Fe)being available somewhere near the Maritimes allows for only one chance
occurrence. The availability of 2 Canadian flats somewhere in the US is of
less probability. I would surmise that the load was started somewhere in
Canada.
-Andy Carlson
Andy,

I'll give you that one, but my real point was that the origin of the ATSF
car had nothing to do with ATSF rails since at the 1944 date US flat cars
were in a national pool as the car service rules were suspended. If the
car was loaded in Quebec, it could have come from just about anywhere
prior to that... proximity to ATSF rails being completely irrelevant (and
thus an SP car has a proportional likelihood completely independent of the
SP's interchange points).

Given how much we have heard over the years about the US-Canadian
interchange rules, and in particular how they were taken much more
seriously than those within the US, due to the serious tax consequences of
violating the border rules, I'd be curious to see if there is actually
some documentation of their suspension for "rare" or unusual cars.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


Re: Interesting boat load

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Mar 4, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Anthony Thompson wrote:
Richard Hendrickson wrote:
At that time the only railroad in North America with a significant
fleet of 60' 70 ton flat cars was the Santa Fe with 192 cars of
classes F-T and Ft-U . . .
For some reason, Richard ignores or is unaware of the SP Class
F-70-3 cars, built in 1942, 60 feet long and numbering 130 cars. The
Santa Fe ain't the only one, my man.










Quite right; I overlooked those in the table in the ORER. Of course,
though the Santa Fe wasn't exactly a near neighbor of the CN, Chicago
was a lot closer to Quebec than the nearest SP connection (presumably
Portland, OR).


Richard Hendrickson


Re: Wide doors on SFRD...

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Mar 4, 2009, at 4:26 PM, Richard Brennan wrote:

Why did the Santa Fe standardize so early ('teens?) on 5ft-0 or
better door widths for the SFRD fleet of refrigerator cars, when most
other operators kept narrow i.e. 4ft doors for decades?

AFAIK... the ubiquitous 48in (by 40 or 48in) pallet was really not in
wide use until the 1940s, so the advent of palletized car loading
would not seem to be the motivation. Were the typical loading dock
arrangements any different for SFRD than say, PFE or WFEX?











Richard, the 5' door width was adopted by SFRD because it made it
easier to load and unload the cars. 4' wide doors required more
careful maneuvering with a loaded hand dolly. Most Santa Fe shippers
preferred the wider doors. In fact, agents reported that many
shippers used to scream bloody murder if they were supplied with
foreign road reefers (MDT, ART, FGEX, etc.) for loading, as they
found the SFRD cars easier to load and also had all of their dunnage
pre-cut to fit SFRD cars.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Interesting boat load

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
At that time the only railroad in North America with a significant fleet of 60' 70 ton flat cars was the Santa Fe with 192 cars of classes F-T and Ft-U . . .
For some reason, Richard ignores or is unaware of the SP Class F-70-3 cars, built in 1942, 60 feet long and numbering 130 cars. The Santa Fe ain't the only one, my man.

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: Interesting boat load

Tim O'Connor
 

Yes, but it is also North. Like I said, the car probably
was chosen for its length and capacity, and nothing else.
The closest ORER to the era that I can lay my hands on is January 1958, and at that time there were still two tables at the back of the book, titled:

Heavey Duty and Special Type Flat Cars
and
Serial Numbers of Flat Cars - 50 Feet and Over in Length

Both these reference Per Diem Rule 21 and Car Service Division Circular No. 439. Rule 21 is an extra charge the shipper pays for the use of the listed cars. I have no reference for CSD No. 439, but I suspect it spells out how a road lacking these special cars can obtain them from another road, similar to how depressed center flats are still managed, or were until recently.
If the load required a sixty foot long flatcar and the CN had none, then they would have to go searching for where they could rent one to service the customer. As of this 1958 listing CN lists only 14 cars over 60' in length (61'-0" IL) and these were only 90,000 lbs. capacity. The may not have been built yet at the time the photo was taken.
Dennis


Dennis

I don't know that any special rules or circulars were needed
when "a road lacking these special cars" needed one. I agree
the car in question may have had a special surcharge applied
to the per diem, since per diem rates normally were the same
for ALL cars of the same type (a source of much complaint as
newer, expensive postwar cars received no more per diem than
old, beat up cars from the 1920's).

Check out the AAR "Home Districts" chart and the page titled

"LOAD CARS AS FOLLOWS (In order of preference)"

( pp.748-749 of the Jan 1953 ORER )

"1 -- Do not load a car off home line if suitable foreign car..."

Key predicate: "if suitable"

CN found no suitable home road, or other foreign car.


"2 -- Load foreign cars via owner roads, whenever possible..."

Since Rule 1 allowed use of the Santa Fe car, rule 2 states
that the route should include Santa Fe, but that isn't possible
to North Bay. So Rule 2's escape clause prevails.


"3 -- Load foreign cars to a Home District.."

North Bay is in the Western Canada home district: CN, CP, GN,
NP, SOO. This "district" stretches 2,000 miles from Sault Ste
Marie to Vancouver Island! So a GN box car can be loaded in
ANY PART OF NORTH AMERICA and routed to any destination in the
entire Western Canada district. Once there, the same GN car
could be shipped to any destination in Iowa or Wisconsin or
Oregon without regard to its actual routing or whether it is
going to use GN rails, and still be in 100% compliance with
Rule 3.

Note the GN only has 5 districts. The Santa Fe has 8, and the
Rock Island has 9! The SP only has 4, while the NYC has 6! The
total number of districts is 23.

Anyway, North Bay is NOT a Santa Fe home district, but it
doesn't matter because Rule 1 has preference over Rule 3.

"4 -- Load foreign cars to a District intermediate..."
"5 -- Load foreign cars to a District beyond or adjoining..."

These are my favorite rules -- I dub them the "almost anything
goes" rules. If you look at the districts map, and then think
about a railroad like the Rock Island with 9 districts, the
number of ADJOINING DISTRICTS plus those 9 is 17!!!!!! So in
general, a Rock Island freight car can be loaded and sent to
any destination in 2/3 of North America and still be in 100%
compliance with these rules!

And.. if the car is NOT loaded in compliance with the rules,
then... NOTHING HAPPENS! There are no penalties, surcharges,
injunctions, orders, lawsuits... Nothing!!

As the ORER states:

"Observance of the above.... will greatly contribute to more
efficient car utilization..."

The basic premise is, railroads should PREFER to load foreign
cars for offline destinations. The idea was that this reduces
empty car miles. But the truth is, that loading ANY car for
ANY destination actually produces the LEAST empty car miles.

And in fact, in the present day ORER (2008):

"Rule 1 Unless covered by a Car Service order or directive
... foreign cars may be loaded without regard to route or
destination"

Tim O'Connor


Re: Interesting boat load

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

Much ado..... North Bay is only about 50 miles east the Quebec border, about 200 or so miles from the nearest practical navigable water (Hull, QUE/Ottawa), and about 300+ miles to Montreal. It could have been loaded in either place, or a thousand other ports along the St. Lawrence or tributaries.

With respect to simplicity in reasoning, why not presume that the caption is accurate, that the boat most likely came from the nearest practicable waterway in nearby Quebec where it could be economically be floated/driven, and that the ATSF flat car was the type they required and it just happened to be available when needed!

As noted, the photographs were taken and captioned for interest in the load, not the flats.

Denny


Re: Interesting boat load

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Mar 4, 2009, at 2:39 PM, Dennis Storzek wrote:
The closest ORER to the era that I can lay my hands on is January
1958, and at that time there were still two tables at the back of
the book, titled:

Heavey Duty and Special Type Flat Cars

and

Serial Numbers of Flat Cars - 50 Feet and Over in Length

Both these reference Per Diem Rule 21 and Car Service Division
Circular No. 439. Rule 21 is an extra charge the shipper pays for
the use of the listed cars. I have no reference for CSD No. 439,
but I suspect it spells out how a road lacking these special cars
can obtain them from another road, similar to how depressed center
flats are still managed, or were until recently.

If the load required a sixty foot long flatcar and the CN had none,
then they would have to go searching for where they could rent one
to service the customer. As of this 1958 listing CN lists only 14
cars over 60' in length (61'-0" IL) and these were only 90,000 lbs.
capacity. The may not have been built yet at the time the photo was
taken.























Leave it to Dennis to - finally - introduce some hard data into what
has become a lengthy discussion consisting almost entirely of blather
and speculation. Though the photos are undated, the reweigh date on
the CN idler flat closest to the camera was 7-44 and appears to have
been freshly applied. My 1-45 ORER shows 18 cars in the CN
600300-600326 series cited by Dennis which were 61' long but, as
Dennis points out, their nominal capacity was only 90,000 lbs., so
essentially they were 40 ton cars (the Canadian RRs rated the weight
capacity of their cars somewhat more generously than those below the
border). At that time the only railroad in North America with a
significant fleet of 60' 70 ton flat cars was the Santa Fe with 192
cars of classes F-T and Ft-U (the Pennsy had a very small number, but
they were converted container flats and may not have been suitable
for the purpose, or simply may not have been available). In such a
situation, car service rules were irrelevant, as the only railroad
that could supply the car the CN needed was the Santa Fe. Note, too,
that this was during World War II, when there was a lot more
tolerance for bending the rules if necessary to get the job done.
It's worth noting that I have a wartime photo of a CP drop center
flat car loaded with a ship boiler en route from American Locomotive
in Schenectady to an American shipyard, so the willingness to
overlook the usual customs and car service rules when necessary was
apparently reciprocal.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Interesting boat load

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

I'm not sure additional internal bracing would have been needed.
Many boats of wooden construction were rolled on their sides for
repairs when beached on soft bottoms by the simple expedient of
winching their masts down to a position nearly parallel with the
ground. The boat depicted likely was built with a strong internal
framework... I think it more likely that this is a working vessel and
not a pleasure yatch, based on its overall design, and that would
also support the used of a strong structure.
Bruce, what you say about the traditional custom of laying wood boats
on to their sides ("careening") for maintenance is true, but it almost
always is for short lengths of time, and most of the time with
considerable attention to internal bracing- something that you might
ordinarily not see (as in this instance). Generally, the hull is
cradled entirely or in large portion by water (they ordinarily are not
beached), and their weight does not have to be borne by a short
tangent of the curving side of the hull such as this hull, a hull
which will moreover be bouncing over several hundred miles of track. I
have "careened my own, and our family's wood boats in the past. Each
and every time, I temporarily clamp additional cross-hull braces in
place to maintain hull shape and integrity. This is a time-honored and
very pragmatic practice.

Because wood boats (in particular) are built to the strength of
"keeping the water out", they are not built to withstand so well
buffets from other directions, including cross beams designed to bear
the entire weight of a hull, and at the same time maintaining hull
shape.

The boat depicted is almost assuredly a commercial boat judging from
its lines and obviously heavy construction. Just the sheer weight of
the hull on its side pushing on just a few frames/ribs not only hazard
the frames themselves, they even more hazard springing the planks and
actually deforming the hull. As a very long time judge and chief judge
at national wood boat shows (now retired!), and also as a wood boat
builder/restorer, I can assure you that wood boat builders of all
stripes are extremely sensitive to these issues.

The greatest problem faced in shipping a wood boat hull by rail is the
real problem of the hull drying out, to the extent of the caulking
falling out of the seams. Inasmuch as it is the tightness of the seams
(one plank tight against another) that provides the basic stiffness
and strength of a wood hull, when the seams open, the planks no longer
do their job and the frames or ribs are left to hold the whole bag-
even more of a reason to do everything possible to relieve abnormal
stresses on the framework.

There are exceptions to these general comments, but they
are...exceptions.

Absolutely great set of photos!

Denny


Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento


Wide doors on SFRD...

Richard Brennan <brennan8@...>
 

Question:

Why did the Santa Fe standardize so early ('teens?) on 5ft-0 or better door widths for the SFRD fleet of refrigerator cars, when most other operators kept narrow i.e. 4ft doors for decades?

AFAIK... the ubiquitous 48in (by 40 or 48in) pallet was really not in wide use until the 1940s, so the advent of palletized car loading would not seem to be the motivation. Were the typical loading dock arrangements any different for SFRD than say, PFE or WFEX?

If the answer is in the ATSF Reference Vol 2... I missed it.

Any thoughts?


--------------------
Richard Brennan - San Leandro CA
--------------------


Re: Interesting boat load

Tim O'Connor
 

Yes, and it could have come from the planet Krypton too!
But I still think you're just making stuff up to try to
rationalize an idea that has been disproven too many times.
You have ZERO evidence for any explanation other than the
photo caption, and as Andy pointed out, it would be a
rather amazing coincidence that the other parts of the
boat are loaded on CN flat cars.

Tim O'Connor

I find that the most likely explanation of this load would be an
error in the caption and the that boat may well have travelled from
the US to Quebec and thence on the CN to North Bay (a westward
movement).
Bruce, by what route? Where did it originate? Why the heck
would it travel from Santa Fe rails to Quebec before it was
sent to North Bay? You're just making stuff up!
Jeez Tim,

We've been over this a bazillion times! What the heck does it have
to do with Santa Fe rails? The ATSF flat car was in a NATIONAL
POOL. The car distribution rules within the US DID NOT APPLY. As I
noted, loading the ATSF car in the northeastern US would have been
within the rules of service for that car. Hypothetically, the car
could have been loaded in somewhere, like say Boston, on the B&M and
then made its way north to Quebec and thence west to North Bay.

Regards
Bruce


Re: Interesting boat load

Andy Carlson
 

Hypothetically, the car
could have been loaded in somewhere, like say Boston, on the B&M and
then made its way north to Quebec and thence west to North Bay.

Andy says:
Again,what would the chance that 2 Canadian flat cars would be available in Boston for use as idlers? The chance of an appropriate flat car (Santa Fe)being available somewhere near the Maritimes allows for only one chance occurrence. The availability of 2 Canadian flats somewhere in the US is of less probability. I would surmise that the load was started somewhere in Canada.
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

Recent Activity
* 9
New Members
* 2
New FilesVisit Your Group
Yahoo! News
Get it all here
Breaking news to
entertainment news
Sell Online
Start selling with
our award-winning
e-commerce tools.
Group Charity
Stop Cyberbullying
Keep your kids
safe from bullying
.


Re: Interesting boat load

Ian Cranstone
 

On 4-Mar-09, at 5:39 PM, Dennis Storzek wrote:
If the load required a sixty foot long flatcar and the CN had none, then they would have to go searching for where they could rent one to service the customer. As of this 1958 listing CN lists only 14 cars over 60' in length (61'-0" IL) and these were only 90,000 lbs. capacity. The may not have been built yet at the time the photo was taken.
The CNR 61' cars were definitely around, having been constructed by the Canada Car Company in 1906 for the Grand Trunk Railway -- whether they were suitable (or available) for this particular lading, is another matter entirely.

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
lamontc@...
http://freightcars.nakina.net
http://siberians.nakina.net


Re: Interesting boat load

Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

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


Yes, but it is also North. Like I said, the car probably
was chosen for its length and capacity, and nothing else.
The closest ORER to the era that I can lay my hands on is January 1958, and at that time there were still two tables at the back of the book, titled:

Heavey Duty and Special Type Flat Cars

and

Serial Numbers of Flat Cars - 50 Feet and Over in Length

Both these reference Per Diem Rule 21 and Car Service Division Circular No. 439. Rule 21 is an extra charge the shipper pays for the use of the listed cars. I have no reference for CSD No. 439, but I suspect it spells out how a road lacking these special cars can obtain them from another road, similar to how depressed center flats are still managed, or were until recently.

If the load required a sixty foot long flatcar and the CN had none, then they would have to go searching for where they could rent one to service the customer. As of this 1958 listing CN lists only 14 cars over 60' in length (61'-0" IL) and these were only 90,000 lbs. capacity. The may not have been built yet at the time the photo was taken.

Dennis


Re: Interesting boat load

cj riley <cjriley42@...>
 

North Bay is south from some parts of Quebec!

CJ Riley

--- On Wed, 3/4/09, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:
From: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Interesting boat load
To: STMFC@...
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 1:26 PM














Yes, but it is also North. Like I said, the car probably

was chosen for its length and capacity, and nothing else.



At 3/4/2009 04:15 PM Wednesday, you wrote:

North Bay is west from Quebec.
CJ Riley
--- On Wed, 3/4/09, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@ comcast.net> wroteBob
That's an interesting interpretation of "general direction"
of the Santa Fe... I suppose a shipper in St Louis could ship
a Santa Fe car to Baton Rouge LA since the latter is closer
to a Santa Fe interchange than the former. Of course there
are so many examples of cars sent in the opposite direction
of their home roads, or loaded many many times off line and
never reaching home rails, that I tend to think the "rules"
were observed in general only if there wasn't an obvious and
immediate use for the empty car... And if that car had roller
bearings, forget it! It could leave home rails and be gone
for years...
Tim O'Connor
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------- --------- --------- -------
Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Interesting boat load

Bruce Smith
 

On Mar 4, 2009, at 3:30 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:


I find that the most likely explanation of this load would be an
error in the caption and the that boat may well have travelled from
the US to Quebec and thence on the CN to North Bay (a westward
movement).
Bruce, by what route? Where did it originate? Why the heck
would it travel from Santa Fe rails to Quebec before it was
sent to North Bay? You're just making stuff up!
Jeez Tim,

We've been over this a bazillion times! What the heck does it have to do with Santa Fe rails? The ATSF flat car was in a NATIONAL POOL. The car distribution rules within the US DID NOT APPLY. As I noted, loading the ATSF car in the northeastern US would have been within the rules of service for that car. Hypothetically, the car could have been loaded in somewhere, like say Boston, on the B&M and then made its way north to Quebec and thence west to North Bay.

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


Re: Interesting boat load

Tim O'Connor
 

I find that the most likely explanation of this load would be an
error in the caption and the that boat may well have travelled from
the US to Quebec and thence on the CN to North Bay (a westward
movement).
Bruce, by what route? Where did it originate? Why the heck
would it travel from Santa Fe rails to Quebec before it was
sent to North Bay? You're just making stuff up!

The car was photographed because of the load that it had,
not because it belonged to the Santa Fe.

Tim O'Connor


Re: Interesting boat load

Tim O'Connor
 

Yes, but it is also North. Like I said, the car probably
was chosen for its length and capacity, and nothing else.

At 3/4/2009 04:15 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
North Bay is west from Quebec.

CJ Riley

--- On Wed, 3/4/09, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wroteBob



That's an interesting interpretation of "general direction"

of the Santa Fe... I suppose a shipper in St Louis could ship

a Santa Fe car to Baton Rouge LA since the latter is closer

to a Santa Fe interchange than the former. Of course there

are so many examples of cars sent in the opposite direction

of their home roads, or loaded many many times off line and

never reaching home rails, that I tend to think the "rules"

were observed in general only if there wasn't an obvious and

immediate use for the empty car... And if that car had roller

bearings, forget it! It could leave home rails and be gone

for years...



Tim O'Connor

































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

Yahoo! Groups Links


116841 - 116860 of 196859