Date   

Re: C&O "For Progress"

Schuyler Larrabee
 

There was another time marker in the C&O For Progress logo, when the line above the train went from
a wavy line indicating steam locomotive smoke, to a straight line, which came about because of
dieselization.

What was the official date for this transition?

SGL


Nevermind my question regarding Kadee not doing the C&O PS-1's
from 16000-16999 series. Ed Hawkins discussed these in Dec 2003
and it sounds like there may be a (rather esoteric) difference
in how the ends were attached to the car sides that differs in
some way from the Kadee model. Sheesh. I like the C&O cars with
yellow letters and I wish there were models available...

Tim O'Connor

40' PS-1 box cars with 8' doors #16000-17999 were delivered starting in late 1950, with yellow
lettering (sans-serif.)
(#16249 blt 12-50; #17099 blt 8-51.)

The yellow didn't hold up well, and some of these cars turn up in mid-50s photos relettered in
the standard style (white
roman) that was used before and after them.
In 1957 yellow lettering started to make a comeback.

Scott Pitzer







E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.1.0.447)
Database version: 6.13140
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
<http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/>






E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.1.0.447)
Database version: 6.13140
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/


Re: Re-trucking with TMW Dalman 2-level

Rob Adams
 

John;

I had exactly the same issue, but the solution to be an easy one. I have an early run CGW AAR box, stock # RC-7048-1, and added the TMW trucks with Intermountain semi-scale wheel sets. I solved the problem by adding a red 0.015 thick fiber washer from Kadee to each bolster. With this configuration and Kadee #58 couplers, the car mated perfectly with a Kadee coupler height gauge.

Regards, Rob Adams



sctry wrote:


In my effort to upgrade my Red Caboose CGW X-29 style boxcars with the new TMW Dalman trucks I have a problem. It appears that the TMW Dalman truck side frame interferes with the carbody bolster by about 0.010". Anyone else with this problem?

Shims between the body and truck bolster will result in the coupler being too high. I am considering removing the modeling draft from the top of the truck sideframe to gain clearance but that may only gain about 0.005". Suggestions please.

John Greedy


Re: Re-trucking with TMW Dalman 2-level

Brian Carlson <brian@...>
 

John: I did not have this problem. I had a newer run patch panel CGW X29
with TMW trucks and code 88 wheels. Are the car body bolsters full seated
against the floor on the outer edges?

Brian J. Carlson, P.E.
Cheektowaga NY

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
sctry
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 4:38 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re-trucking with TMW Dalman 2-level

In my effort to upgrade my Red Caboose CGW X-29 style boxcars with the new
TMW Dalman trucks I have a problem. It appears that the TMW Dalman truck
side frame interferes with the carbody bolster by about 0.010". Anyone else
with this problem?


Re: C&O "For Progress"

Tim O'Connor
 

Nevermind my question regarding Kadee not doing the C&O PS-1's
from 16000-16999 series. Ed Hawkins discussed these in Dec 2003
and it sounds like there may be a (rather esoteric) difference
in how the ends were attached to the car sides that differs in
some way from the Kadee model. Sheesh. I like the C&O cars with
yellow letters and I wish there were models available...

Tim O'Connor

40' PS-1 box cars with 8' doors #16000-17999 were delivered starting in late 1950, with yellow lettering (sans-serif.) (#16249 blt 12-50; #17099 blt 8-51.)

The yellow didn't hold up well, and some of these cars turn up in mid-50s photos relettered in the standard style (white roman) that was used before and after them.
In 1957 yellow lettering started to make a comeback.

Scott Pitzer


Re: C&O "For Progress"

Tim O'Connor
 

Scott, those were two different PS lots:

C&O series 16000-16999 blt 1950 PS lot 5983 8' IY Yellow ltr
C&O series 17000-17999 blt 1951 PS lot 8017 8' IY Yellow ltr

Anyone know what was different about those PS-1 box cars than most
1950-1953 PS-1 box cars? Kadee surely would have produced this paint
scheme if any of their models matched the prototype. It may be something
as simple as rivets on the ends. I know this has stopped Kadee on some
other paint schemes.

Tim O'Connor

The "For Progress" slogan was applied from early 1948 on.
Tim,

Thanks for the insight. Do you have any idea about the yellow on red car versus the white on red car?
----------------------------

40' PS-1 box cars with 8' doors #16000-17999 were delivered starting in late 1950, with yellow lettering (sans-serif.) (#16249 blt 12-50; #17099 blt 8-51.)

The yellow didn't hold up well, and some of these cars turn up in mid-50s photos relettered in the standard style (white roman) that was used before and after them.
In 1957 yellow lettering started to make a comeback.

Scott Pitzer


Re: C&O "For Progress"

Scott Pitzer
 

--- In STMFC@..., "mforsyth127" <mforsyth127@...> wrote:

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


The "For Progress" slogan was applied from early 1948 on.
Tim,

Thanks for the insight. Do you have any idea about the yellow on red car versus the white on red car?
----------------------------
40' PS-1 box cars with 8' doors #16000-17999 were delivered starting in late 1950, with yellow lettering (sans-serif.)
(#16249 blt 12-50; #17099 blt 8-51.)

The yellow didn't hold up well, and some of these cars turn up in mid-50s photos relettered in the standard style (white roman) that was used before and after them.
In 1957 yellow lettering started to make a comeback.

Scott Pitzer


Charles photos [Was: PRR H21e quad hopper . . . ]

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

A.T. Kott wrote:
I wish someone would publish the remainder of the 1947-era photos in the Charles collection! I love every one of them so far!
Someone closer to the current state of the collection, such as Larry Kline, will know more than I do, but I had the impression that the great bulk of the Charles photos WERE included in the NMRA book.

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: Re-trucking with TMW Dalman 2-level

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

John Greedy wrote:
In my effort to upgrade my Red Caboose CGW X-29 style boxcars with the new TMW Dalman trucks I have a problem. It appears that the TMW Dalman truck side frame interferes with the carbody bolster by about 0.010". Anyone else with this problem?

Shims between the body and truck bolster will result in the coupler being too high. I am considering removing the modeling draft from the top of the truck sideframe to gain clearance but that may only gain about 0.005". Suggestions please.
I'd agree that the draft of the model sideframe is the best thing to remove, as it's usually rather excessive compared to a prototype truck.

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: PRR H21e quad hopper with riveted side stakes + H21b's

proto48er
 

Steve -

Thank you very much for pointing out the H21b photo to me. I purchased a copy of Teichmoeller on Amazon and just received it. The photo is a great help!

When PSC imported their "O" scale model of an "H21a" back in the 1980's, I recall that their sales newsletter had prototype photos of the interior of a prototype car. The PSC model faithfully copied that interior shot. The flat-topped centersill led me to believe that the model was really an H21b. The remainder of the interior is pure H21a, and therefore not an H21e. The centersill on the model is not correct for an H21a, but probably represents the H21b - PSC must have had plans from someone, because this detail does not show in most photos.

In addition to the PRR cars in the book, I was excited to see photos of an N&W H-3 as leased to B&O. My time frame is April, 1948. The lease to B&O was from 1944 "through 1948" according to the book. The April 1948 ORER lists about 45 of the leased N&W cars (out of 2,000) still in the B&O roster. The January 1948 ORER lists about 150 under lease; the July 1947 ORER has more than 650 in the B&O roster. The lease must have been tapering off. I have too many N&W hoppers - a favorite of "O" scale importers along with C&O - so am glad to have my H-2 finished in B&O paint, with a couple of minor modifications!

Thank you again!

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "pennsylvania1954" <stevehprr@...> wrote:

A. T.--In the Teichmoeller book, p. 157, H21b 744007, shown in Harrisburg, 1948.

Steve Hoxie
Pensacola FL


Re: PRR H21e quad hopper with riveted side stakes

proto48er
 

Phil -

I just received the Teichmoeller book, and the two photos of H21e's on page 158 do indeed represent the "O" scale model that Bob Parri made. The only difference is that Parri's model has the ladder on the left of the carside - a later addition for ease in servicing the AB brakes, apparently. Taking the ladder stile off the model, there is already a rivet in the proper place under it! Easy to backdate.

I wish someone would publish the remainder of the 1947-era photos in the Charles collection! I love every one of them so far!

Thanks again!

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "proto48er" <atkott@...> wrote:

Phil -

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

I am now going to have to purchase that book.

It is very true that Bob Parri was a craftsman and made few mistakes! I have been adding small details to a series of his NYC/P&LE/PMcK&Y USRA steel gondolas, and continue to marvel at his skill. He made an amazing 800 or so brass cars in a 12 year period. That is really impressive, considering how few cars I have done in a decade.

A.T. Kott


--- In STMFC@..., PHIL MARCUS <marcusphil@> wrote:

See Teichmoeller book page 158. Photo of PRR h-21e 714303 and 745759. Both are riveted construction. Bob Parri was a craftsman not an importer. He did a lot of research, had much help and made few mistakes.
Phil Marcus


Re-trucking with TMW Dalman 2-level

sctry
 

In my effort to upgrade my Red Caboose CGW X-29 style boxcars with the new TMW Dalman trucks I have a problem. It appears that the TMW Dalman truck side frame interferes with the carbody bolster by about 0.010". Anyone else with this problem?

Shims between the body and truck bolster will result in the coupler being too high. I am considering removing the modeling draft from the top of the truck sideframe to gain clearance but that may only gain about 0.005". Suggestions please.

John Greedy


Re: B&O P31 Flats

rwitt_2000
 

--- In STMFC@..., "rwitt_2000" <rwitt_2000@...> wrote:


--- In STMFC@..., "Brian Carlson" brian@ wrote:

I picked up one of the new models. I understand the deck issues.
What
trucks
were these cars fitted with when built. The B&O Modeler has one
prototype
photo of a P-25a and it has 70 ton spring plank trucks. I'm
wondering
if
the IM Trucks should be replaced.

Brian J. Carlson, P.E.
Cheektowaga NY
Yes, it is clear from the photos on the Elwood site that the trucks
were
70-ton spring plank trucks.

FB 9432 <http://gelwood.railfan.net/bo/bo9432akg.jpg> - Newark NJ -
08/07/83 - {Karl Geffchen Photo} - B end

What other 70-ton truck would you use?

Bob Witt
I forgot to add that the later class P-31, the current lettering from
InterMountain, used 70-ton spring-plankless trucks as seen in this photo
from the Elwood site.

FB 9719 <http://gelwood.railfan.net/bo/bo-f9719goa.jpg> -
- 03/77 - {Gary Overfield Collection}

Bob Witt


Re: Rock Island box car?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Bob Witt wrote:
If the photographer had looked at the trucks and noted the railroad initials cast in the sideframes Tim would have his answer.
Provided, of course, that the trucks were still the owning railroad's trucks. I've seen plenty of counter examples.

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: Morning Sun tank car book?

D. Scott Chatfield
 

I think Jim Kinkaid is working on two tank car books for Morning Sun. They are due next year.

Scott Chatfield


Re: B&O P31 Flats

rwitt_2000
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Brian Carlson" <brian@...> wrote:

I picked up one of the new models. I understand the deck issues. What
trucks
were these cars fitted with when built. The B&O Modeler has one
prototype
photo of a P-25a and it has 70 ton spring plank trucks. I'm wondering
if
the IM Trucks should be replaced.

Brian J. Carlson, P.E.
Cheektowaga NY
Yes, it is clear from the photos on the Elwood site that the trucks were
70-ton spring plank trucks.

FB 9432 <http://gelwood.railfan.net/bo/bo9432akg.jpg> - Newark NJ -
08/07/83 - {Karl Geffchen Photo} - B end

What other 70-ton truck would you use?

Bob Witt


Re: Rock Island box car?

rwitt_2000
 

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
wrote:


On Aug 26, 2009, at 3:30 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

The Ebay seller says this is a Rock Island box car. Anyone
recognize it?

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c248/myoungwisc/May%20Slides/
riBracedBoxcar_unk_unk_stamped.jpg
The design is USRA 50 ton single sheathed. Definitely not Rock
Island, which owned no such box cars. And definitely not built for
the USRA, as the ends are 7/8 corrugated, not 5/5/5. I'm not aware
of any US railroads that had such cars, but the Canadian Pacific had
a lot of them built in the early 1920s.

Richard Hendrickson

The press steel bracing show signs of repairs where they trapped water
and it received A-B scheduled brakes, but without any paint or
stenciling visible the owner remains a mystery. If the photographer had
looked at the trucks and noted the railroad initials cast in the
sideframes Tim would have his answer.

Bob Witt


Re: Rock Island box car? - How about C&NW?

rockroll50401 <cepropst@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote: But it turns out I have a Soph Marty photo of an identical C&NW car
As a pitch, Mike Moore will be showing some of Soph's freight car slides at this year's (last) Naperville meet.
Clark Propst


Re: C&O "For Progress"

mforsyth127
 

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


The "For Progress" slogan was applied from early 1948 on.
Tim,

Thanks for the insight. Do you have any idea about the yellow on red car versus the white on red car?

Thanks,

Matt Forsyth

Modeling the D&H Penn Division/
Erie Jefferson Division in
"O" scale, Fall of 1951


Re: C&O "For Progress"

Tim O'Connor
 

The "For Progress" slogan was applied from early 1948 on.

Can anyone advise as to when the C&O first started lettering box cars with the "For Progress" slogan, and in addition, when they started using that slogan on oxide red cars, but were doing so in yellow versus white?

I have a few color images of those cars (w/yellow "For Progress" on red car with black ends and roof) floating in some northbound D&H merchandise trains on their Penn Division, circa 1950.

More data on specific a date for that scheme would be much appreciated.

Thanks,

Matt Forsyth

Modeling the D&H Penn Division/
Erie Jefferson Division in
"O" scale, Fall of 1951


Re: Intermountain 8K Tank Cars

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 27, 2009, at 3:55 AM, atsfsd26 wrote:

IM lists an 8K tank car stencilled for Canton Tank Car Co and
another for Globe Oil.
Are there prototypes for these models and while I gather Globe Oil
was an oil producer or distributor, what did Canton do?
If correct are these cars appropriate for 1953?
The good news is that both the Canton Tank Car Co. and Globe Oil cars
are based on prototype photos. The bad news is that both companies
were absorbed by others well before 1953 so the prototypes were no
longer around by that date.

Richard Hendrickson

112441 - 112460 of 196824