Bill - I have a list of the NP scheme changes at:
http://www.union.rpi.edu/railroad/images/rolling-stock/Paint/Paint-N.html
as best I can find the information (mostly from Todd Sullivan's NP Color
Guide) and I would assume the reefer schemes followed the same chronology.
(And if not, I'd be glad to note that in that section.) - John

All,

For a variety of reasons, I was unable to attend either of
Sunshine Models' seminars here in California. There was one in Southern
California on the 4th, and one in Northern California on the 11th.

Can some of the attendees comment on the presentations and the
event in general?

Thanks,

-Jeff

--
Jeff Aley, Development Engineer jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
Graphics Components Division
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533

A Will Whittaker photo of NP double sheathed boxcar 12855 photographed in March 1954, with a reweigh date of 10-52, shows the car with the larger Monad or yin/yang symbol and "Main Street of the Northwest" stenciled below it.

My question relates to the application of the monad to the NP's doubled sheathed reefers. Would these reefers, or at least some of them, also had the larger monad by the early fifties. Would they also have received the "Main Street of the Northwest" slogan?

I am getting ready to start painting two "Norwest" reefer models and I am wanting to think about how to decal them using the Microscale set, which includes both sizes but provides no historical information regarding dates of application of the various schemes.


Bill 'Welch <bwelch@uucf.org>
Associate Minister, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Fairfax
P.O. Box 130 Oakton VA 22124 www.uucf.org
Telephone 703 281-4230 Fax 703 281-5399

After my minor diatribe t'other day, I decided to review some of the
other answers given to friend Richard (Stallworth) and felt the urge to
go above and beyond. To wit:

Grab Irons: I prefer Westerfield's wire grabs - they're brass,
which
I feel is easier to work with, especially when you have to file them
flush with the inside of an open car.

This is kind of a cop out answer, since most wire grabs available are
brass. The question is should we be encouraging friend Richard to keep
using the same old, same old .012" wire which we all know is about 50%
overscale? Why not encourage him to bend his own using .010" or even
.008" wire, a task I find I can do in less time than straightening some
of the prefab grabs, and get nice sharp corners in the bargain. Besides,
a lot depends where he's installing those grab irons, somebodies kit
where the size is predetermined, or a self inflicted location.

BTW, sometimes filing flush is not the thing to do. Let them project
about .005" and it will represent the bolt head on the inside of the car.
remember, they do not use lag bolts to hold grab irons on. In fact one
of the major points in the original 1911 Safety Standards was that all
hand holds (sic) be held on in a non loosening way. That would mean
either rivets or bolts with the threads projecting about 1/2" beyond the
nut on the visible side and its edges peened over, i.e. riveted. The
theory being that a lag bolt could loosen up in transit and when a
workman grabbed on, it would come loose spilling said workman all over
the countryside.

Your choices for bracket type
grabs are much more limited, with the Details Associates part being
pretty much the only game in town.

Actually, as discussed, DA is not even in the game, unless you model in
OO scale. I'm still looking for a place to use 24" bracket grabs. Any
of the newer kits grabs, IM, BLT, RC are at least the more common 18"
wide, but represent 2" diameter rod, rather than the more common 5/8" -
3/4" used. And the bracket parts are closer to 1"x3" bar, rather than
the 3/8" x 11/2" used. There are ways to model them more accurately, but
not in an email message.

Stirrup Steps: A-Line steps whever prototypically appropriate - the
wire steps hold up better under layout conditions than the Details
Associates derlin steps; however, Details Associates makes a greater
variety of types.

More disagreement, especially because I hate to see these parts on a
model with those cursed wide radius corners while the prototype has crisp
sharp corners. The DA steps, where there is a close match, is so much
closer to scale than any DIY version I have seen, and I have yet to break
one, either off or internally. The key is proper handling and
installation.

I know a lot of our list members swear by A-Lines steps, but I prefer to
bend my own, with sharp corners, from DA .010" x .030" brass. It's a
little smaller than A-Line uses, I think, and takes a crisp corner, most
of the time. OTOH, I am looking for a source of strip brass closer to
.007" x .020" for my own future use. I may even have to cut it myself.

Brake Details: Tichy makes very nice K and AB brake sets which blow
away the previous standard, the old Cal-Scale sets.

Only if you model TT scale. See my previous message.

Brake Wheels: For later brake wheels, Kadee offers the same ones on
their PS-1's spearately, though without housings. Details
Associates
offers a variety of brake wheels with housings. Precision Scale
makes a very nice Ajax brakewheel (no housing).

Except for Ajax wheels and housings, where there is a choice, this
depends on what is appropriate to the prototype (don't you just enjoy
typing that word, all on one line of the keyboard!) being modeled and who
offers the correct type. All the non-Ajaxs seem to be pretty good
representations, but I'm sure there are others who know much more about
this subject than I do. I wish they'd make that info more readily
available.

For metal running boards, etched metal is the way to go, with
Plano Model Products making a good variety of designs. Just
remember
to use a flexible adhesive such as R/C 50 or Weldbond or (in the
immortal words of Tim O'Connor) SPROING!!

Done right, yes to all of above. Problem is, nobody does them right. If
you bother to check a real RUNNING BOARD (that was for RHs benefit),
you'd see that the thickness at the edge is about 1 1/4" to 1 3/4",
depending on type. Most etched running boards are .005" to .007" thick,
which is way less than half of what they should be. Look at a photo of a
typical model with an etched board, and besides the waves which infect
it, it looks like it will depress when anything heavier than a small dog
walks on it. The solution to metal boards is to solder wire to each
edge, which is nigh onto impossible and still keep 'em straight. Another
problem is the joints between running board panels which occur on the
(alternating) supports which on most steel roofs are at 37" or 39" apart
(I forget which). An unbroken stretch of etched metal board kinda looses
that rhythm of running board to roof ribs. It can be solved, but its not
as easy as it should be, at least not yet.

Properly building and detailing freight car models, as well as any
models, is an ongoing process. It starts with learning as much as
possible about your subject and then incorporating that knowledge into
your construction efforts. Learning can happen by building models,
reading how others build models, learning how real cars were (and still
are) built, and seeing how real cars are built. For instance, the best
way to see how underbody equipment is put together is too look under a
freight car. Fortunately, there are enough cars from our era still in
existence that can be peered under. There are also cameras available
today (that were not as recently as 15 years ago) that can effortlessly
take excellent underbody detail photos to share with all of us so the art
won't be lost when the cars are.

Just remember, pre-digital photographs don't lie. If you model what's on
a photo, your models should be pretty close to accurate. Just don't
question that statement please, because even I don't think I understand
it now that I've written it.

Byron Rose
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

Dear Larry,

Your idea is great. You could probably guarantee a manufacturer that
each of the 200 or so people on this list would buy ten underframes. But
how could they cover the other 48,000 or so they need to sell to make any
money on it.

I hate to say it, but this is a subject best left to resin castings.
That's the only venue available to us for the real life quantities that
this type of model represents. Sorry.

Did'ja notice that LifeLike sold out all the built up tank car models
they brought in, while Martin Loftin is still begging people to buy his
kit? I guess that's not a fair comparison to make. How about this. I
built one P2K kit and than went and bought a dozen built ups. How many
others did the same?

And contrary to your casual remark about using existing tank castings,
'tain't so. It seems every tank car manufacturer used different
combinations of diameter and length to get to those 6, 8, and 10,000
gallon sizes. Using info from 50 years worth of Cycs, I've found only a
handful that could be adapted from the 4 existing riveted tanks, and then
only by diameter, their lengths would have to be changed. That doesn't
even begin to cover the 4, 6, and 12,000 gallon sizes.

I've also thought about making a pattern for some of those sizes to be
cast in resin. Making a proper coned rivet is the easy part, punching
them into brass only slightly less easy, rolling said shell and keeping a
curve behind each rivet completely escapes me. You see, each little
round pyramid reinforces the metal around it's base so that when the
shell is rolled, it will appear as though it a series of flat surfaces
joined by bent planes, rather than curved. Remember, those rivets on the
prototype were hammered in after the shell was curved. So far, we don't
have that luxury. The cast tanks available had the rivets cut into the
molds after the roll of the tank was cut.

OTOH, there's the possibility of using the same old NWSL rivets punched
into styrene sheet as usual, but then we'd have a tank that looked just
like all those imported brass models with those cute little dimples,
rather than the big, hefty RIVETS they need. How could we tell them
apart?

I'm still trying to get my act into order to make available copies of my
patterns for the corrected ACF tank car underframe which sits 65%
completed in a box on my work(?)bench. A URTX underframe was supposed to
be next. I hope that when Martin Loftin does his it's more accurate than
his ACF underframe.

Byron Rose


On Fri, 09 Mar 2001 09:07:48 -0500 Larry King <ab8180@wayne.edu> writes:

3-5-01

This is a revision of a note I sent to John Nerich's NYB&W
website. The
discussion by Richard Hendrikson about the need for UTLX tank cars
prompts
me to repeat it:
Why couldn't one of the detail parts makers (ie, Detail
Associates,
Tichy,New England Rail Service,etc)make a separate UTLX X-3 style
underframe in styrene that could be fitted to the several available
tanks
from Tichy, Intermountain(especially Intermountain),and Red
Caboose,perhaps
with a center sill that would be cut to length to suit the
particular
tank.This could result in accurate UTLX models without the
investment in
die work needed for the whole car, especially the tank. AB or K
brake
options could be provided too.The data needed is available in the
Car
Builder's Cyc and on museum cars.
I would think the "prototype conscious" crowd would provide a
customer
base for such a part, even if not for complete UTLX kits. Remember
that
UTLX was like PFE- the cars all looked much alike but were around in
huge
numbers and went everywhere. Everybody needs a few!

LR King


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

3-9-01

My comments about UTLX car frames was simply throwing an idea out there
for consideration.I had always thought there was general standardisation of
the X-3
underframe in the UTLX fleet. If this was in fact not so,obviously this
would limit the use of an aftermarket underframe. Are you sure the cars you
measured were in fact built to UTLX design, and did not come into the fleet
from somewhere else?

Regards,
LR King

Larry,
Sometime ago I measured three UTLX tankcars built prior to WWII. One was a
100,000lb (10,036 gal) capacity insulated car built 8-14-1920. The second
insulated car was 10,032 gal and built 6-23.The uninsulated one was a
80,000lb capacity built 10-37. All three had different end walks.

Will someone pick and manufacture the most comman centerframe, say the X-3
6,000 gal car, the 8,000 gal car or the 10000 gal car? Or is there a chance
the centerframe will be similar to the Tichy tankcar frame and allow for
some modification? Has Tichy or Grandt Line or Detail West shown any
interest in creating such a centerframe? I'd be interested in buy a coulpe
dozen. I'd be just as interested in buying a couple dozen of the 5 vertical
band tank cars. Just thoughts, any comments?
Larry Sexton

3-5-01

This is a revision of a note I sent to John Nerich's NYB&W website. The
discussion by Richard Hendrikson about the need for UTLX tank cars prompts
me to repeat it:
Why couldn't one of the detail parts makers (ie, Detail Associates,
Tichy,New England Rail Service,etc)make a separate UTLX X-3 style
underframe in styrene that could be fitted to the several available tanks
from Tichy, Intermountain(especially Intermountain),and Red Caboose,perhaps
with a center sill that would be cut to length to suit the particular
tank.This could result in accurate UTLX models without the investment in
die work needed for the whole car, especially the tank. AB or K brake
options could be provided too.The data needed is available in the Car
Builder's Cyc and on museum cars.
I would think the "prototype conscious" crowd would provide a customer
base for such a part, even if not for complete UTLX kits. Remember that
UTLX was like PFE- the cars all looked much alike but were around in huge
numbers and went everywhere. Everybody needs a few!

LR King

I would be glad to post any such lists, either as scanned in jpeg files or
text files, on the rpi site for all to share. - John

Larry,

I believe that this is what is coming from Sunshine Models, although it will
be a complete kit that includes an Intermountain tank. Apparently the holdup
is getting someone to etch the brass details that are to be included in the
kit: platforms, ladders, etc. I'm as eager as anyone to get these kits on the
market. Sunshine's earlier ACF 8,000-gal insulated tank car makes an
absolutely stunning model. They're a challenge to build, but the builder's
efforts are well rewarded. The new X-3 tank car was designed to greatly
lessen that "challenge" and still yield an outstanding and versatile model.

Charlie

Jeff - Years ago I brought a portable copier into the ACF archives at St.
Charles and copied the lot list up through about 1955. I've made copies of
the list at cost for about half a dozen persons. Ed Kaminski has a copy of
the complete list. However, his is missing a column indicating the
existence of a builder's photo; mine has that.

Someone does have a copy of the Pullman lot list - however, each lot is on a
separate sheet so the stack is many feet high. I know of no others.

- Al Westerfield
Westerfield

Gosh Byron, I ain't mad at ya! In fact, in answering Richard's questions, you answered some I had not thought to ask, thanks.

Warren Dickinson

Hello Richard,

Since nobody seems to have answered all of your questions, I thought I'd
take it upon myself to do so and get everybody good and mad at me. Here
goes:

On Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:56:44 EST ThisIsR@aol.com writes:

Good afternoon:
Is there a problem in getting models from Sunshine Models?
I've heard
it mentioned on other lists that it takes a very loonnggg time to
receive
models or
catalogs from this company.

The best way to get Sunshine Models is directly from Martin at one of the
many shows he goes to each year, especially his own in Naperville each
fall. Even when you order one from him in person that he doesn't have on
hand, it's still a 3 month wait. I've tried asking him for specific kits
a month before I was going to see him at a show, and it was still a 3
month wait - from the time of the show. Or ask a friend, perhaps someone
on this list, to pick them up for you when they see him.

Is there a particular detail parts company that is better at
building steam-era
super detail parts? More variety?

Best in overall quality is Grandt Line. Next is Precision Scale.
Followed by Detail Associates, Tichy, Bowser (Cal Scale) etc., etc., etc.
But keep in mind that no one company makes everything you'll need for
any freight car project. Also, you have to beware that some parts made
by some of them should be avoided. Fer instance, contrary to what some
before me have said, Tichy and Cal Scale AB brakes fall into that
category. Most, if not all of their AB brake parts are undersize. Just
compare them to the same parts made by Grandt Line (and Detail Assoc.)
which are pretty close to correct HO scale. The Cal Scale AB valve is
grossly squished, about .025" was removed from its middle many years ago,
and good old Bowser copied it in that exact misshaped form last year.
Tichys part is closer to TT scale. OTOH, the Cal Scale K brake is the
only one made with a proper size and shape to the triple valve part of
it.

Of the other parts out there, you need to try some of each and see if
they represent what you are trying to create. Remember that you are
building miniature versions of a real once-existing piece of equipment
and every part going into the miniature should be representative of that
on the full size car.

At what point did carbuilders and railroads switch from wooden
roofwalks to steel roofwalks?

Although new car construction changed from wood to steel after WW2, older
cars never were required to change and many of them retained their wood
walks until their death or disroofwalkment. Many cars had their walks
changed when they underwent a major rebuilding at some later point in
their life. The only real answer to this question is to look at photos
of that which you are modeling. If you have a photo of a 1932 built box
car taken in 1958 and it has a metal roofwalk on it, it's a good bet
that's what your model should have a metal roofwalk if you want it
representative of 1958.

BTW, the best way to represent wood roofwalks on a model is with
Evergreen 2x6 styrene strips. Almost any cast roofwalk will have board
ends and carriage bolt heads (not nails or rivets, but that's a subject
for another diatribe) patterns which will probably NOT line up with the
supports on the car you're modeling. They're easy to build from scratch,
and give your model a little customized detail visible from it's most
viewed from position.

Thank you for your time!
Richard Stallworth

You're welcome!

Byron Rose
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From time to time several contributors to this list will quote
citations from a Lot List for one or more of the historical car
builders. My question is how does one go about acquiring one's
own copy of such lists, rather than relying on random mentions on
this list. For which builders are there known to be lists available?
Obvious desirable builders' lists would include Pullman, ACF,
PSC, SSC, Haskell & Barker, Magor, Mt. Vernon, etc. I'd love to
find one for MDT/Despatch Shops, but I think that one is unlikely.

Guy Wilber writes:

<<4. Southern Pacific 58403 WB F.Oil 3-17-49>>

This would be an 0-50-12 proving that the SP cars may have wondered

somewhat.

<<10. Southern Pacific TNO 51215 WB Oil 5 3-19-49 This car's No. does

not

match '53 ORER >>

If this is the correct number for the SP it would have been a fairly

ancient

(for the time) 1903 built CS-25A tank of which only a "handful" were still

in

service in 1949. There were also transfers of 0-50-5 tanks from T&NO to

SP

(pre WWll), but this number does not fit into that number range
(51080-51132

Guy, looking at the number again, there is not much doubt that it is 51215.
The only questionable number might be the "2" but Fraley did his "7" with a
straight top and usually with a tiny perpendicular on the left side of the
top "bar". His "2" sometimes doesn't have the trailing bottom which this one
doesn't have. The TNO is pretty clear.

I'll be completing the tank cars soon...looking at the SDRX and SHPX cars.

Mike Brock

In a message dated 3/8/01 10:20:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,
guycwilber@aol.com writes:

<< may have wondered somewhat. >>

They wandered and we wondered.

Guy

Mike listed the following cars from his UP conductors' book:


<<4. Southern Pacific 58403 WB F.Oil 3-17-49>>

This would be an 0-50-12 proving that the SP cars may have wondered somewhat.

<<10. Southern Pacific TNO 51215 WB Oil 5 3-19-49 This car's No. does not
match '53 ORER >>

If this is the correct number for the SP it would have been a fairly ancient
(for the time) 1903 built CS-25A tank of which only a "handful" were still in
service in 1949. There were also transfers of 0-50-5 tanks from T&NO to SP
(pre WWll), but this number does not fit into that number range
(51080-51132). Ed Workman, Bill Kelly or Tony T. may know more.

Cool stuff Mike.

Regards,

Guy Wilber
Sparks, Nevada

I believe Martin's plan is to include tanks as a part of the kit.

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 3/7/01, at 8:27 AM, Dave & Libby Nelson wrote:

Would the IM tank come with the kit or be purchased separately?

Dave Nelson

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Welch [mailto:bwelch@uucf.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 7:02 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] What is holding up UTLX tank car kits


Regarding these kits and what is holding up their release from
Sunshine Models, the catch is that Martin L. is having difficulty
finding someone to do the photoetched parts in the kit. The
patterns are done for the underframe. The underframe is designed
to have its length easily changed to accomodate different length
tanks. Designed essentially to use the InterMountain 8K & 10K
tanks, one will be able to easily shorten the underframe to fit a
Life Like 8K or 10K tank to it, for example. I know I
specifically acquired extra undecorated LL kits with this in mind.

I will use the extra LL underfrmaes that result with the smaller
tanks Tichy is planning to do as extra parts to be fitted with
alteration to his underframe.


Bill 'Welch <bwelch@uucf.org>
Associate Minister, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Fairfax
P.O. Box 130 Oakton VA 22124 www.uucf.org
Telephone 703 281-4230 Fax 703 281-5399

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Bill 'Welch <bwelch@uucf.org>
Associate Minister, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Fairfax
P.O. Box 130 Oakton VA 22124 www.uucf.org
Telephone 703 281-4230 Fax 703 281-5399

Would the IM tank come with the kit or be purchased separately?

Dave Nelson