Date   

Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Jerry Michels wrote:
Erroneous information in the 128-page wonder books is certainly a problem. It is a shame that these authors, editors and publishers do not realize that these are not "pretty" books, but should be regarded as histories.
Very true, Jerry, and the exact reason why, after two books for Yanosey, I declined to do any more. He told me he did not WANT history in the captions, "just keep them short and sweet," he said. I'd written a number of captions (for photos HE selected and laid out), and he said they were all too long and "too fussy."
It's been reported that Yanosey has since seen the light--not something I can personally vouch for--but I'm not aware of a single Sweetland book which doesn't contain bunches of errors. Sweetland's Morning Sun book on the "SP in Color" has some captions which will make you laugh out loud they are so wrong.
I've given people the same advice about Sweetland that I do about the Henderson freight car books: enjoy the photos but put your thumb over the captions while doing so, lest the foolishness seep into your system. And please note I referred to "Henderson," NOT by any means "Hendrickson."

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: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Al Kresse wrote:
There are other public libraries who have gotten government grants to have photographer's negative sleeve notes transcribed into captions . . .
Many of the Steinheimer negatives at the DeGolyer had gotten stuck into the wrong sleeves, though the sleeves had original photographer's notes. An obvious case of good info not related to what was then in the sleeve! That's now being corrected by Dick's wife Shirley (with the help of a grant).

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: Frameless tank car questions

Richard Hendrickson
 

On May 20, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Dave Nelson wrote:

I'm trying to find the answer to a couple of questions on the
frameless tank
cars used by UTLX near the start of the 20th century and google isn't
helping.

What is the proper name for this design?
Did UTLX have some sort of class name they used for these?
Any info on on long these cars might have been in interchange
service (my
personal time period of interest is 1950).
And perhaps most important to me, what was a typical light weight
for these
cars?











Dave, I can add to the information Andy Sperandeo posted that some of
these cars were still in service in the early 1950s, though mostly
for non-regulatory commodities by that time, but that all were gone
by August, 1953 because of their age and the difficulty of replacing
their original K brakes with ABs, since there was no center sill to
which the new brake components could be attached.

I can add that in the early '50s UTLX 15371 had a light weight of
31600 lbs. (with a weigh date of "NEW 4 12" !).

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Help on B&O M-53 last years of Creco doors.

rwitt_2000
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "George" <gsc3@...> wrote:


From another list a question is arising as to the last date a B&)
Wagontop M-53 could use a Creco door. A search of the prior listings
show a lot of discussion on Creco's but no clear date for this car with
this door. Can anyone help?

Thanks,
George Courtney
These are NOT Creco doors. They are "XLT" doors the "trade name" used
by the inventor and patent holder John Tatum Superintendent of Cars for
the B&O during the period these cars were designed and built. The
wagon-top design as used by the B&O was also patented by him.

I have three photos of M-53 still with their original Tatum "XLT" doors
with re-weight dates of 1952 and 1953. A shop photo from Mt. Clare
Shops shows a car with Youngstown replacement doors with a re-weight
date of 1950. As was often the case Mt. Clare Shops would do the first
conversion and workout the details before instructions for replacing the
doors would be send to the other car shops throughout the system. The
program would be implemented as time and funds were available. The B&O
always lacked funds in the 1950's so any replacement plan probably took
longer than initially scheduled.

I hope this helps

Bob Witt


Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

water.kresse@...
 

More serious is the notion that libraries or archives can pitch the original photographers notes on old negative sleeves, or hand typed notes for groups of negatives . . . or Rr PR departments notes when calling out what negatives to print or the old frames with notes around browning prints . . . because they are now digitially re-entered by humans as they wish.  Please save them, separately, until they crumb apart !



Al Kresse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Harding" < dharding @ nethtc .net>
To: STMFC @ yahoogroups .com
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 8:41:35 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [ STMFC ] Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Two weeks ago I was researching the M& StL at the Mercantile Library in St.
Louis, accessing the Barriger Collection. While going through John
Barriger's photo album of the M& StL photos, I noticed more than a few photo
captions contained errors. While these were not freight car photos, a person
using this collection as a first source of historic value, could come away
with incorrect information in their notes. I mentioned the errors to the
attendant, but had no way of correcting the captions. While I knew the
correct information for the M& StL , the experince made me suspicious of other
"facts" recorded for which I was not familiar. I know, you should always
double check and verify, but sometimes when doing historic research you only
have one source.

As to captions in books and magazines, as an author I have submitted
captions which were not used or edited to where I hardly recognized them. If
the person who does the finally proof reading does not know the subject
matter, well .....

Doug Harding
www . iowacentralrr .org



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


Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

water.kresse@...
 

Folks,



There are other public libraries who have gotten government grants to have photographer's negative sleeve notes transcribed into captions.  One recent caption we noted on a Columbus, Ohio, late-1940 image noted a train running over the Little Miami River bridge south of Columbus.  Actually, it was taken near the Little Miami Rr and C&O Rwy crossing-tower (LM Cabin) on the Scioto River bridge west of Columbus.  I'm hoping to correct the caption when I purchasing a hi-res scan of this negative.  Lots of times, the head curator has the caption files locked down so only he or she can modifiy them or enter new ones in a batch mode.



We hope to minimize this at the C&O HS archive work sessions by pairing off younger and older members to enter these captions . . . and asking a lot of dumb questions.  The "slave-labor run" system is not perfect.



Al Kresse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Harding" <dharding@nethtc.net>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 8:41:35 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [STMFC] Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Two weeks ago I was researching the M&StL at the Mercantile Library in St.
Louis, accessing the Barriger Collection. While going through John
Barriger's photo album of the M&StL photos, I noticed more than a few photo
captions contained errors. While these were not freight car photos, a person
using this collection as a first source of historic value, could come away
with incorrect information in their notes. I mentioned the errors to the
attendant, but had no way of correcting the captions. While I knew the
correct information for the M&StL, the experince made me suspicious of other
"facts" recorded for which I was not familiar. I know, you should always
double check and verify, but sometimes when doing historic research you only
have one source.

As to captions in books and magazines, as an author I have submitted
captions which were not used or edited to where I hardly recognized them. If
the person who does the finally proof reading does not know the subject
matter, well .....

Doug Harding
www.iowacentralrr.org



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


Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

Likewise, most US Army Signal Corps photos from WW II have captions printed on the back, written by the photographer who took the picture. Quite a few have the wrong location, wrong unit, or wrong tank or airplane model. Not an uncommon problem, it seems.

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas Harding

Two weeks ago I was researching the M&StL at the Mercantile Library in St.
Louis, accessing the Barriger Collection. While going through John
Barriger's photo album of the M&StL photos, I noticed more than a few photo
captions contained errors. While these were not freight car photos, a person
using this collection as a first source of historic value, could come away
with incorrect information in their notes. . .


Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Douglas Harding <dharding@...>
 

Two weeks ago I was researching the M&StL at the Mercantile Library in St.
Louis, accessing the Barriger Collection. While going through John
Barriger's photo album of the M&StL photos, I noticed more than a few photo
captions contained errors. While these were not freight car photos, a person
using this collection as a first source of historic value, could come away
with incorrect information in their notes. I mentioned the errors to the
attendant, but had no way of correcting the captions. While I knew the
correct information for the M&StL, the experince made me suspicious of other
"facts" recorded for which I was not familiar. I know, you should always
double check and verify, but sometimes when doing historic research you only
have one source.

As to captions in books and magazines, as an author I have submitted
captions which were not used or edited to where I hardly recognized them. If
the person who does the finally proof reading does not know the subject
matter, well .....

Doug Harding
www.iowacentralrr.org


Re: The growing problem of erroneous captions

Schuyler Larrabee
 

Ed Hawkins wrote "The caption in the NYC color guide book is erroneous.."


Erroneous information in the 128-page wonder books is certainly a problem.
It is a shame that these authors, editors and publishers do not realize
that these are not "pretty" books, but should be regarded as histories. As
more and more faulty information gets into print, the quality of railroad
history is degraded. It is degraded because each and every caption needs to
be analyzed, post-publication, by an expert on a particular railroad to
whom accuracy is important. Only someone devoted to a specific railroad or
railroad era knows when the information is wrong. Since I follow the
Missouri Pacific I can usually spot errors in books related to that railroad (and
they are legion), but I'm at a loss when it comes to determining if
information in a caption tagged to an NYC or C&O photo is accurate. If it were
not for lists such as this, these inaccuracies would go unnoticed. However
the corrections noted here are somewhat ephemeral; even if you search the
archives. I would like to trust the information in these books. As it stands,
however, the accuracy of these books is at times equivalent to the
accuracy of Lionel paint schemes. Thank goodness we have the Hawkins, Thompsons,
Cullotas and others who produce quality railroad history books that
counterbalance the pathetic efforts of the picture books.

Now if we could lay to rest the RMJ-inspired urban myth that the Missouri
Pacific had blue cabooses!

Jerry Michels

What Jerry says here is all too true. One reason is the later comment about "underpaid," which is really true. I know of one author whose compensation for the fifth book was one quarter of the compensation for the first book. Incredibly, IMHO, he's still working on another book, but only when he has absolutely nothing better to do. The result of this is that the authors who are doing these books now tend to be people who like to see their name in print, whether they know the topic or not. Now, having said that, I know I've mortally insulted some people reading this who will probably be ready to shiv me at Cocoa. Oops, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned I'll be there. ;^)

Seriously, I know personally that some of the authors really are pretty light in the native knowledge department. Many, I hope most, are very knowledgeable. It becomes a matter of a) knowing something about the topic yourself so you can turn on your BS meter, and b) knowing something about the author and how much credence you put in what they have to say.

I will say this. Larry DeYoung's six books on the EL, while not absolutely error free, are very very good and reliable. And yes, I do know him.

SGL






E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.441)
Database version: 6.12420
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

leakinmywaders
 

Also note, the NP cars I listed were first builds, not rebuilds.

There was one additional "mongrel" group of leased NP boxcars, series 37000-37899, that were ca. 1962 rebuilds of various early AARoid boxcars of ex-Erie and DLW heritage. These do not at all match the Accurail model (e.g., Viking or rectangular panel roofs, Buckeye or early dreadnaught ends, 10ft IH, paired 6ft sliding and 6 foot plug doors).

Chris Frissell
Polson, MT

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "leakinmywaders" <leakinmywaders@...> wrote:

Scott: Here are more specific dates and related information for the NP boxcar series of the 40ft plug+sliding door configuration:
...


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

leakinmywaders
 

Scott: Here are more specific dates and related information for the NP boxcar series of the 40ft plug+sliding door configuration:

NP 8000-8499 1958 NP RY Brainerd Shops
NP 3000-3339 1959-60 Pullman–Standard
NP 8450-8849 1959-60 NP RY Brainerd Shops
NP 8850-9148 1960 NP RY Brainerd Shops
NP 9150-9200 1960 NP RY Brainerd Shops

Note all of these cars had ZU (overhanging) eave roofs, unlike the Accurail model, and a different door configuration than the model (a 6ft width Youngstown sliding door paired with an 8 foot width plug door). The P-S built series and certain Brainerd-built cars in the ca. 8450-8849 range had P-S bowtie ZU eave roofs and P-S ends. All others had Improved Dreadnaught ends as the model does. The P-S built series had welded side panels, but the remaining series had riveted side panels of approximately the configuration of the model.
Regards,

Chris Frissell
Polson, MT

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Pitzer" <scottp459@...> wrote:

The review in the May 2009 issue starts by saying 40' box cars of this configuration were built between 1947 and 1964; then it states the first such cars were built by the GN shops in October 1953.
Among the initial roadname offerings is "Union Pacific (mineral red, lettered in yellow as built in 1947)."
So when WERE cars of this type first built?
BTW the Accurail ad on page 16 of that issue shows a UP car with the "Be Specific..." slogan, which was not in use in 1947.

Scott Pitzer


Re: Frameless tank car questions

Adrian Hundhausen
 

Dave; try http://www.utlx.com/download/TankCarHistory.ppt
<http://www.utlx.com/download/TankCarHistory.ppt>

It gives a bit of info on the Van Dyke design with some photos.

Adrian Hundhausen
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Nelson" <Lake_Muskoka@...> wrote:

I'm trying to find the answer to a couple of questions on the
frameless tank
cars used by UTLX near the start of the 20th century and google isn't
helping.

What is the proper name for this design?
Did UTLX have some sort of class name they used for these?
Any info on on long these cars might have been in interchange service
(my
personal time period of interest is 1950).
And perhaps most important to me, what was a typical light weight for
these
cars?

Dave Nelson


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

Tim O'Connor
 

Dennis

The large UNION PACIFIC gothic lettering began in 1956.

The BC-50-8's received new roofs, ZU eave, diagonal panel.
There's a fine builder photo of UP 110052 in the UPCG Vol. 1.
Also the UP cars had 12' door openings (6+6) while the Soo
cars have 14' (8+6) like the model. (The Color Guide caption
ridiculously says that the UP opening is 9'10" -- weren't we
just lambasting Morning Sun captions?)

Front Range produced a model decorated for UP as a BC-50-8,
although they wisely left off the car class, and all dates! :-)
The Front Range doors measured just over 12' wide. However,
the car has a flush roof and lacks the diagonal rivets for
the door post. (Easily corrected now with Archer rivets.)

So really, the Accurail car is best suited to represent the
Soo Line cars. Major surgery is needed for other prototypes.
And there's still those old Front Range, and McKean (PS-1),
bodies floating around...

Tim O'Connor

Yes, That's what the pix in our files show. That's why we lettered our model as a BC-50-*8*, and we have a scan of a photo showing it with the large UNION PACIFIC on two lines, with the 'Be Specific' slogan. From your dates on the paint scheme change, it would appear these were rebuilt sometime prior to 1961 or '62. Re-weigh date on the photo is no help, as the car has a new 1965 date over a paint patch.

I have to admit, a NEW 4-47 weight date made it onto the model, it's a victim of our policy of putting the oldest applicable weigh date on models so they will be most useful to the most modelers. I don't think the graphics guy realized these cars were rebuilt, until this morning I didn't either.

Now that we've tied these cars to the B-50-39 cass, I see that these cars did not have "ZU" eave construction, same as our model. So these, and the SOO car, are actually the most correct.

Dennis


Re: Frameless tank car questions

Andy Sperandeo <asperandeo@...>
 

Hi Dave,

It was called the Van Dyke tank car, and it was Union Tank Car's Type V. Car UTLX 15847, a 1912 Van Dyke of nominal 6,000-gallon capacity was stenciled for a light weight of 31,300 pounds. There's a photo of it (dated 1941) in Larry Kline and Ted Culotta's "The Postwar Freight Car Fleet."

So long,

Andy

Andy Sperandeo
Executive Editor
Model Railroader magazine
asperandeo@mrmag.com
262-796-8776, ext. 461
FAX 262-796-1142


Frameless tank car questions

Dave Nelson
 

I'm trying to find the answer to a couple of questions on the frameless tank
cars used by UTLX near the start of the 20th century and google isn't
helping.

What is the proper name for this design?
Did UTLX have some sort of class name they used for these?
Any info on on long these cars might have been in interchange service (my
personal time period of interest is 1950).
And perhaps most important to me, what was a typical light weight for these
cars?

Dave Nelson


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

Dennis Storzek
 

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

Dennis,

As far as I can tell all of the BC-50-10's received the new
Automated Rail Way scheme with the large full color shield.
UP stopped using yellow lettering in 1961 or early 1962. The
BC-50-11's and -12's received yellow paint because they also
received cushioning and that was the standard for cushioned
cars from that time.

Tim O'Connor
Yes, That's what the pix in our files show. That's why we lettered our model as a BC-50-*8*, and we have a scan of a photo showing it with the large UNION PACIFIC on two lines, with the 'Be Specific' slogan. From your dates on the paint scheme change, it would appear these were rebuilt sometime prior to 1961 or '62. Re-weigh date on the photo is no help, as the car has a new 1965 date over a paint patch.

I have to admit, a NEW 4-47 weight date made it onto the model, it's a victim of our policy of putting the oldest applicable weigh date on models so they will be most useful to the most modelers. I don't think the graphics guy realized these cars were rebuilt, until this morning I didn't either.

Now that we've tied these cars to the B-50-39 cass, I see that these cars did not have "ZU" eave construction, same as our model. So these, and the SOO car, are actually the most correct.

Dennis


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

Tim O'Connor
 

Grain had something to do with it, but also this was the
time when railroads stopped buying 40 foot cars and opted
for 50 foot cars instead. Many railroads bought combination
door 50 foot cars from the 1950's through the 1980's. Many
were later converted into double sliding door cars, but that
is an issue for BBFCL... :-)

Tim O'Connor

The MILW, GN, and NP all built similar cars in 1958, Soo in 1959, NP again in 1960. The general adoption of covered hoppers for grain loading in the sixties eliminated these cars reason for being, which was to provide a wide door opening on a car that could still be coopered with standard grain doors for grain loading, and no more were built.
Dennis


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

Tim O'Connor
 

Dennis,

As far as I can tell all of the BC-50-10's received the new
Automated Rail Way scheme with the large full color shield.
UP stopped using yellow lettering in 1961 or early 1962. The
BC-50-11's and -12's received yellow paint because they also
received cushioning and that was the standard for cushioned
cars from that time.

Tim O'Connor

That's because our webmaster picked up the "Built 1947" from the builder's badge stencil on the car. However, these are rebuildings of older cars. Our lettering scheme is based on a photo of a BC-50-8, I see a magazine tear sheet here in the file of a BC-50-10 and the caption states that it is one of 500 cars rebuilt from the 100,000 series in 1963. These were PS-1's built in 1948 as B-50-40. The cars built in 1947 were B-50-39, and had Dreadnaught ends. Unfortunately, since Metcalf's book doesn't document changes after 1951, I don't have a firm rebuild date, but it's likely early sixties, just eary enough to be painted in the "Be Specific" scheme.
Dennis


Re: Carmer Uncoupling Levers

Guy Wilber
 

In a message dated 5/20/2009 9:48:48 AM Central Daylight Time,
chapbob@aol.com writes:

Is there a cutoff date where carbuilders stopped using Carmer uncoupling
levers and switched to the rotary design?



Bob,

From the Interchange Rules:

Rule 3, section (c), paragraph (9) Coupler operating rigging of the rotary
type handle (which pulls out and up through an arc similar to type shown on
plate B of the United States Safety Appliance specifications), required on
all cars built new or rebuilt on or after August 1, 1933.

Note: It is recommended that when cars built prior to August 1, 1933,
receive Class I general repairs and new couplers are applied, that the
rotating type handle of uncoupling rigging be applied.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
West Bend, WI
**************Dell Inspiron 15 Laptop: Now in 6 vibrant colors! Shop Dell’s
full line of laptops.
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222399266x1201456865/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215073777%3B3703434
3%3Bf)


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


Re: Confused by RMC review of Accurail plug+sliding door box car

Dennis Storzek
 

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


Scott, very few railroads bought such cars -- CB&Q, CP, GN, MILW,
NP, PGE, RI, SOO, UP. This particular model represents a Soo Line
car built in 1959. They definitely were first built in the 1950's,
mostly in the later 1950's. As far as I know the only one built
after 1960 was for PGE (Pacific Great Eastern), and you'd never
confuse it with this model.

Tim O'Connor
I have a scan of a picture in the files, looks like from the CBC from the style of the caption, of a Union Pacific BC-50-11 that shows a built date of 11-64. It has dreadnaught ends, but we won't be doing it unless I can get the them painted and assembled in China. The 'Automated Railway' sheme with the silver roof, ends, and frame is expensive to mask.

The MILW, GN, and NP all built similar cars in 1958, Soo in 1959, NP again in 1960. The general adoption of covered hoppers for grain loading in the sixties eliminated these cars reason for being, which was to provide a wide door opening on a car that could still be coopered with standard grain doors for grain loading, and no more were built.

Dennis

106901 - 106920 of 188504