Date   

Re: Replacement Domes for Athearn Tank Car?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Jun 17, 2009, at 9:55 AM, blindog@mindspring.com wrote:

Details Associates offered a resin dome for the Athearn tank, part#
6219, but it's been out of stock for some time. You might find one
covered in dust at a hobby shop. It's just a taller version of the
molded dome. However, if the UP's O-50-6 needs a fatter dome,
you're in trouble.





Years ago I contemplated kitbashing the Athearn tank car into an
O-50-6 using the DA dome (a few early ones were made in die cast
metal before they were made of resin) but the UP car does, indeed,
require a dome that's larger in diameter as well as taller, and being
reluctant to scratch-build the entire dome and flange, I abandoned
the project.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Replacement Domes for Athearn Tank Car?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Scott Chatfield wrote:
Details Associates offered a resin dome for the Athearn tank, part# 6219, but it's been out of stock for some time. You might find one covered in dust at a hobby shop. It's just a taller version of the molded dome. However, if the UP's O-50-6 needs a fatter dome, you're in trouble.
The work needed to use that DA dome was NOT simple, and I understand they don't intend to offer the part in the future anyway.
The UP Class O-50-6 tank cars DID have a massive dome, 70 inches diameter, rather more than the Athearn dome. It was also 17 inches high on the dome cylinder at the top tank seam, where the Athearn is about 11 inches. The SP cars of the same gallonage had the same dome diameter as the Athearn car, but domes were 22 inches high. Not being a UP modeler, I don't know if anyone has ever done these cars in brass, but if anyone did, I'd guess it was Overland.

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: Kadee 158s

Marty McGuirk
 

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

Some years ago now, somebody sold a manual uncoupling device that you would insert between the two knuckles and give a small twist to uncouple.
The tip had the same shape as a Zulu warrior spear head. I remember it working very well.
Pierre Oliver
Pierre,

I believe it was Accurail - I have a handful of them.

Yes, they work quite well.

Marty


Re: Replacement Domes for Athearn Tank Car?

D. Scott Chatfield
 

Steve Kay wrote:

I am preparing to do a model of a UP 0-50-6 tank car and am considering basing this on an Athearn blue box car. THe dome on this model is apparently too small. Does anyone make a replacement part for this? Or better yet, is there a more accurate model of this design? There is an article in the March 1999 MRR that describes a major rebuild of the dome,which I would like to avoid if possible.

Details Associates offered a resin dome for the Athearn tank, part# 6219, but it's been out of stock for some time. You might find one covered in dust at a hobby shop. It's just a taller version of the molded dome. However, if the UP's O-50-6 needs a fatter dome, you're in trouble.

Scott Chatfield


Re: Kadee 158's uncoupling tool

Joseph Melhorn
 

Is this what you are referring to: http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page241.htm
? I make my own uncoupling tools from a Staedtler Retractable 2mm Drafting
Pencil and a 2mm piece of steel rod (available from LHS). I remove the piece
of lead, cut the 2mm steel to 5", then grind a point on one end and a chisel
point on the other end. Nice thing about the drawing pencil is that the
steel is retractable and the pencil clips into your shirt pocket. Also good
for herding slow moving operators along in front of you <grin>.

Joe Melhorn
Orangevale, CA


Some years ago now, somebody sold a manual uncoupling device that you would
insert between the two knuckles and give a small twist to uncouple.
The tip had the same shape as a Zulu warrior spear head. I remember it
working very well.
Pierre Oliver

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Clark Propst" <cepropst@...> wrote:

I've replaced the couplers on 50 cars with Kadee 158 scale knuckle
'whisker' couplers and am about to do another 50. But, the local ops guys
have trouble uncoupling them with a wood skewer. Is there a better tool to
use?


Re: Kadee 158s

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Jim Betz wrote:
I have found that the #158s (and all other 'more scale' couplers) are harder to pick than "old reliable" #5s. And significantly harder if you are trying to uncouple a #58 size head with a #5 size. When op'ing on layouts
with all/lots of #58 size heads you see more hands grabbing the cars. Don't get me wrong ... I love the whisker couplers - but find that they are slightly more likely to not uncouple as easily if the track the coupled cars are on is anything other than straight. And they don't "play well with others".
Jim, I'd agree entirely with these observations. My feeling is that the biggest problem comes when the two cars to be uncoupled have relatively close coupling, so that it's harder to get the pick in there to do the job. And I have also observed that a #5/#58 or #78 pair is more of a problem that two #58s. But the smaller heads do look great, so I'm sure we're not going back. And as for the occasional problems on curved track, where one or both drawbars have to be nudged to couple, well, that's exactly what happens on the prototype. If anything, we should welcome that little additional bit of accuracy! Just my two cents.

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: Kadee 158s

Jim Betz
 

Clark,

I build my own uncoupling picks using golf tees. First I sand them into
a wedge/chisel shaped end that is a bit wider than it is deep. Then I sand
the end to a dull rounded point that resembles the shape of a symmetrical
butter knife. Experiment with the size of the wedge - pay attention to the
ratio of the width to the depth. I sand two flat edges on the head of the
tee - to make holding and turning them just a bit easier/more predictable.
Use very gentle to zero downward pressure when turning ... if you push down
too hard it tends to lock/jam the wedge-pick in the couplers and prevent them
from opening.

I have found that the #158s (and all other 'more scale' couplers) are
harder to pick than "old reliable" #5s. And significantly harder if you are
trying to uncouple a #58 size head with a #5 size. When op'ing on layouts
with all/lots of #58 size heads you see more hands grabbing the cars.
Don't get me wrong ... I love the whisker couplers - but find that they
are slightly more likely to not uncouple as easily if the track the coupled
cars are on is anything other than straight. And they don't "play well with
others".

I love the look of them - and the way they stay coupled (they are perhaps
slightly more likely to uncouple when going thru less than perfect track
that has vertical curves in it) - and hate them (relative to #5s) when
uncoupling.

Love-hate relationships ... that's sort of what life is all about? ;-)
- Jim


Re: Kadee 158s

Charles Hladik
 

Pierre,
Go to the nearest McDonalds and abscond with some plastic coffee
stirrers. Cut the "paddle" to a "spearpoint" and viola.
Chuck Hladik

In a message dated 6/17/2009 9:48:10 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
pierre.oliver@sympatico.ca writes:





Some years ago now, somebody sold a manual uncoupling device that you would
insert between the two knuckles and give a small twist to uncouple.
The tip had the same shape as a Zulu warrior spear head. I remember it
working very well.
Pierre Oliver

--- In _STMFC@yahoogroups.STM_ (mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com) , "Clark
Propst" <cepropst@..c> wrote:

I've replaced the couplers on 50 cars with Kadee 158 scale knuckle
'whisker' couplers and am about to do another 50. But, the local ops guys have
trouble uncoupling them with a wood skewer. Is there a better tool to use?
I must say that I'm so busy working on ops switch lists and playing
engineer for test ops. I haven't tried my hand...er... I must say that
I think the whisker springs really enhance the cars tractability
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa

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




**************Download the AOL Classifieds Toolbar for local deals at your
fingertips.
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolclassifieds/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000004)


Re: Kadee 158s

pierreoliver2003 <pierre.oliver@...>
 

Some years ago now, somebody sold a manual uncoupling device that you would insert between the two knuckles and give a small twist to uncouple.
The tip had the same shape as a Zulu warrior spear head. I remember it working very well.
Pierre Oliver

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Clark Propst" <cepropst@...> wrote:

I've replaced the couplers on 50 cars with Kadee 158 scale knuckle 'whisker' couplers and am about to do another 50. But, the local ops guys have trouble uncoupling them with a wood skewer. Is there a better tool to use?
I must say that I'm so busy working on ops switch lists and playing engineer for test ops. I haven't tried my hand...er...skewer on them yet.
I think the whisker springs really enhance the cars tractability
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa

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


Re: Kadee 158s

rockroll50401 <cepropst@...>
 

That's what they do Steve.
Clark Propst

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sandifer@...> wrote:

Try using the skewer to pull the glad hand apart instead of inserting into the coupler jaws.
______________
J. Stephen (Steve) Sandifer
mailto:steve.sandifer@...
Home: 12027 Mulholland Drive, Meadows Place, TX 77477, 281-568-9918
Office: Southwest Central Church of Christ, 4011 W. Bellfort, Houston, TX 77025, 713-667-9417


Hoppers with punch press scrap (was New York Central train consists)

David Payne
 

In a message dated 6/14/2009 2:32:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
destorzek@mchsi.com writes:

The car had previously been loaded with punch press scrap (strips of sheet
steel with multiple shapes cut out of it) which hadn't been entirely
unloaded from the hopper pockets before the slag was loaded. One miserable day.
We finally ended up cutting the chains so the door would swing free to get
the load to move. What a mess.

So, it is entirely possible to have a hopper car loaded with scrap. In
theory, the magnet should be able to pick most, if not all, of it out.




In the late 1960s, 3-bay Southern hoppers with ALUMINUM punch press scrap
were interchanged between the CG (SOU) and the WPR (A&WP) at Newnan, Ga.
Aluminum wouldn't be picked up by a magnet. I'm sure some pieces were left
when the car was unloaded.

Another interesting thing about this movement was that the cars were loaded
in Forest Park, taken about 20 miles south to Griffin, brought west about
25 miles to Newnan, then handled about 40 miles back to Atlanta by the
A&WP. Forest Park is about 15 miles south of Atlanta.

Shipper car routing ... I assume.

David Payne
Acworth, Ga
nee Raymond, Ga
on the CofGa Ry

**************Download the AOL Classifieds Toolbar for local deals at your
fingertips.
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolclassifieds/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000004)


Re: GATX 1638

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Your concerns over the nature of that car seem to have not been misplaced!

Speaking of lube oil, the PRR had a very small "fleet" of tank cars, one
class being the TM8B, which were triple compartment cars of varied parentage
(one looks like an ex-Deep Rock car). I was told they used the outermost two
compartments for clean oil, and the innnermost for shipping back dirty oil.
Speculation is that engines burned or leaked enough lube oil to make more
capacity than that single compartment unnecessary.

I have also been told that USSteel's by-products operations, which produced
numerous different liquid by-products like xylol, toluol, cresols, pyridine,
coal tars & creosote and such, was sometimes loaded into multi-compartment
tanks, both of uninsulated and insulated design, depending on the customer.
Some customers got different commodities in one shipment, and a triple
compartment car could also have only the outer two compartments used. Some
manufacturers that used these products only needed small volumes at any one
time, and used very small tank cars in that service. Pharmaceutical firms
were one that did not use large volumes.

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Brock
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 6:25 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: GATX 1638



Jack Mullen writes:

3. The photo of 1638 that Richard Hendrickson furnished appears to be
lettered " Not For Flammable Liquids". Given that the commodity
loaded is not patroleum based, what would be an expected substance
loaded? More importantly, what would its color be?
Whoa, Mike. I think you've jumped to a wrong conclusion that all
petroleum based liquids are "flammable". ICC/DOT "flammable"
placarding is for liquids with a relatively low flash point. Many
petroleum products, including lube oils (a common multi-compartment
tank car cargo) have high flash points and are not placarded.
Good thing. GATX 1638...in keeping with my message regarding its somewhat
cantankerous [ hoping that one can be "somewhat" cantankerous ]
personality...apparently dumped [ on its own ] compartment A during a stop at
Buford. Cleanup crews rushed to the scene apparently believing it to be
carrying over 3000 gallons of California wine. Regretfully for them, it was
indeed carrying lube oil.

Mike Brock


Re: Replacement Domes for Athearn Tank Car?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Steve Kay wrote:
I am preparing to do a model of a UP 0-50-6 tank car and am considering basing this on an Athearn blue box car. THe dome on this model is apparently too small. Does anyone make a replacement part for this? Or better yet, is there a more accurate model of this design? There is an article in the March 1999 MRR that describes a major rebuild of the dome,which I would like to avoid if possible.
I can't remember for sure, Steve, and don't have my UP materials at hand to check, but I think the Athearn dome is both too small in height and too small in diameter. There is a method to fix the height, which both Richard Hendrickson and I have published, but the diameter problem, if it applies to the UP O-50-6 cars, obviously WOULD require a new dome. Unless you can figure out a way to inflate that dome with internal air pressure . . . <g>

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: Kadee 158s

Bernd Schroeder
 

or use the uncoupling thingie from Accurail...

http://www.accurail.com/accurail/parts.htm

they also come with the 50pcs packages of the scale size accumates



Bernd

----- Original Message -----
From: <steve.sandifer@sbcglobal.net>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Kadee 158s


Try using the skewer to pull the glad hand apart instead of inserting into the coupler jaws.


Re: Kadee 158s

Steve SANDIFER
 

Try using the skewer to pull the glad hand apart instead of inserting into the coupler jaws.
______________
J. Stephen (Steve) Sandifer
mailto:steve.sandifer@sbcglobal.net
Home: 12027 Mulholland Drive, Meadows Place, TX 77477, 281-568-9918
Office: Southwest Central Church of Christ, 4011 W. Bellfort, Houston, TX 77025, 713-667-9417

----- Original Message -----
From: Clark Propst
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 10:07 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Kadee 158s





I've replaced the couplers on 50 cars with Kadee 158 scale knuckle 'whisker' couplers and am about to do another 50. But, the local ops guys have trouble uncoupling them with a wood skewer. Is there a better tool to use?
I must say that I'm so busy working on ops switch lists and playing engineer for test ops. I haven't tried my hand...er...skewer on them yet.
I think the whisker springs really enhance the cars tractability
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Kadee 158s

Clark Propst <cepropst@...>
 

I've replaced the couplers on 50 cars with Kadee 158 scale knuckle 'whisker' couplers and am about to do another 50. But, the local ops guys have trouble uncoupling them with a wood skewer. Is there a better tool to use?
I must say that I'm so busy working on ops switch lists and playing engineer for test ops. I haven't tried my hand...er...skewer on them yet.
I think the whisker springs really enhance the cars tractability
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Replacement Domes for Athearn Tank Car?

StephenK
 

I am preparing to do a model of a UP 0-50-6 tank car and am considering basing this on an Athearn blue box car. THe dome on this model is apparently too small. Does anyone make a replacement part for this? Or better yet, is there a more accurate model of this design? There is an article in the March 1999 MRR that describes a major rebuild of the dome,which I would like to avoid if possible.

Any ideas?

Steve Kay


Re: GATX 1638

david zuhn
 

of a yard office. It just amazes me how may modelers are interested
in how the paper work for all this actually worked. You would have to
start adding people to your layouts to do some of the jobs, just as
a real railroad did, and I'm not too sure some of them would find all
the paper work that interesting to handle?
I've been running with a dedicated Freight Agent position for several
years now, and have never found a problem finding someone who is
willing to run a "paperwork position". That person will act as a yard
clerk, managing all of the bills at the Agent's desk, and writing
switch lists to hand off to the crews. It's a sit down position,
which helps to attract some people at the end of a long weekend of
operating. There's a fair amount of watching those steam era freight
cars go by too.



--
david d zuhn Saint Paul Bridge & Terminal Ry.
zoo @ stpaulterminal.org


Re: Rutland-NYC

Alan Palmer <rrgeekdev@...>
 

The Rutland was half owned by the NYC and half by the NH before WW1. The NYC
and the NH also owned the NYO&W. Some horse trading occurred where the NH
received all of the stock NYC had in the NYO&W and NYC received all of the
stock in the Rutland. When the Rutland entered bankrupcty in 1935, the NYC's
ownership of shares ended.

The NYC and Rutland had a joint depot in Norwood, NY and Malone Junction,
NY. Running rights of the NYC on Rutland from those two points occurred up
until the end of the Rutland in 1961.

For equipment, the Rutland had a lot of handmedown steamers, especially the
F12 steamers.

There's a pretty good site done by the Rutland Railway Historical Society at
http://www.rutlandrr.org.

Alan


2009/6/16 Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@comcast.net>

In the June 2009 RMC, page 63 is a picture showing
C&NW facilities in Missouri Valley Iowa and there's
a double sheathed box car (mostly hidden) that says
RUTLAND on the left side of the door, and it has
a NEW YORK CENTRAL emblem on the right side of the
door. The photo is not dated -- when was the Rutland
so closely involved with the NYC? And why didn't it
remain in the NYC family?

Tim O'Connor



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

Yahoo! Groups Links




GATX 1638

FRANK PEACOCK
 

Mike. DON'T number your car 1635. It was a single compartment car with 8050 gal shell and 250 gal. dome capy. 1638 had 3928/158 for both compartments.FHP (Frank H. Peacock)
_________________________________________________________________
Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MLOGEN_Core_tagline_local_1x1

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

106461 - 106480 of 188720