Date   

Re: Freight car Distribution

Tim O'Connor
 

Tony

I have no tariff documentation for "Overland" traffic (e.g. a box
car of machine parts from Oakland to Chicago) but wouldn't tariffs
also specify routes since rate divisions would have to be worked
out ahead of time?

In other words, for the above example, the shipper might have a
choice of (1) Santa Fe all the way (2) SP-UP-CNW [or others] (3)
WP-D&RGW-MP-Wabash [for example]. Is this true? With multi-railroad
services, then if we change "friendliness" to "joint through rates"
then I would be 100% behind that.

Tim O'Connor

SP's preference was to route via the Sunset Route, but SHIPPERS
could specify the other, shorter route, and they did. The UP on the
other hand, to reach northern California, had to use SP, WP or AT&SF
connections. SP and AT&SF held all the cards as it were. The WP had
a weak hand, but historical common ownership of the WP/D&RGW/MP
forged a competitive route. If WP is under-represented on the UP
(not proven AFAIK) I suspect the reasons are far more complex than
any "hostility" among the railroads.
I'd agree about "hostility," but do think that "friendly connections"
mattered. In the case being discussed, I would not expect WP underrepresented
on UP, but definitely overrepresented on D&RGW. Why wouldn't that lead to
lower numbers on UP? Because many box cars (of all roads) are going to
or from places NOT ON THEIR HOME ROADS. A load coming from Road A to Road B
need not be in EITHER road's box car. In fact, this point is really at the
heart of the G-N hypothesis.

Tony Thompson


Exact Rail Milwaukee Road Ribside

Marty McGuirk
 

I saw one of these at Timonium this weekend but I have one of the Intermountain cars and an as yet unbuilt Sunshine kit so I didn't buy the Exact Rail model - was too busy spending money on the TLT Canadian cars. (When you model the Central Vermont you can never have enough CN boxcars).



So, any thoughts on the Exact Rail car from those who have seen them.



Thanks,



Marty












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


Re: REA Wood-Sheathed Express Reefer Question - New Question

golden1014
 

Gentlemen,

Would anyone have access to an instruction sheet from an old Sunshine Models General American wood-sheathed express refrigerator model? Model series would be 27.1. That might show the underframe and a drawing or photo of parts placement so I can finish my project. Jim Hayes has the .pdf for the order sheet, but not the instructions. Thanks a bunch if you can help out.

John Golden
Bloomington, IN

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "John" <golden1014@...> wrote:

Gentlemen,

I'm finishing a few models of General American REA wood-sheathed express refrigerators (the recent Walthers models). I want to improve the level of brake gear detail provided with the model, but cannot find any good views or plans of the underframe. I looked through RPC #7 but there are no clear photos. Incidentally, one of the cars I'm modeling is the 1227 featured on pg. 17.

If anyone has any tips or photos or references, I'd appreciate hearing about it. This is a relateively new subject for me and I'm learning a lot. Thanks in advance for the help!

John Golden
Bloomington, IN


Re: Freight car Distribution

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
The PRR & B&O covered almost identical territories. Not at all like the WP, SP and UP. After the breakup of the Harriman empire, the SP/ UP were not overly friendly -- but the Overland Route was a geographic fact of
life -- each railroad needed the other.
SP and UP weren't "overly friendly" throughout the 19th century as well as post-Harriman, but there were legal requirements, still in force in the era of this list, which compelled SP and UP to preferentially interchange at Ogden (the D&RGW finally ended that in a 1960s court case). SP and PFE had to solicit for UP routing north of the Tehachapi Mountains and Santa Margarita on the coast; they could route via Sunset south of those points. This agreement was part of the 1922 settlement of the government's divestiture case against SP.

SP's preference was to route via the Sunset Route, but SHIPPERS could specify the other, shorter route, and they did. The UP on the other hand, to reach northern California, had to use SP, WP or AT&SF connections. SP and AT&SF held all the cards as it were. The WP had a weak hand, but historical common ownership of the WP/D&RGW/MP forged a competitive route. If WP is under-represented on the UP (not proven AFAIK) I suspect the reasons are far more complex than any "hostility" among the railroads.
I'd agree about "hostility," but do think that "friendly connections" mattered. In the case being discussed, I would not expect WP underrepresented on UP, but definitely overrepresented on D&RGW. Why wouldn't that lead to lower numbers on UP? Because many box cars (of all roads) are going to or from places NOT ON THEIR HOME ROADS. A load coming from Road A to Road B need not be in EITHER road's box car. In fact, this point is really at the heart of the G-N hypothesis.

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: REA Wood-Sheathed Express Reefer Question

golden1014
 

Hi Ed,

Thanks for the reply. I checked both articles but no joy. Gene Green shot me an e-mail offline and he may have something--I'll let you know if it's significant. I'll also spam the passenger car list to see if they can help too.

John Golden
Bloomington, IN

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Ed Hawkins <hawk0621@...> wrote:


On Apr 10, 2010, at 11:07 AM, John wrote:

I'm finishing a few models of General American REA wood-sheathed
express refrigerators (the recent Walthers models). I want to improve
the level of brake gear detail provided with the model, but cannot
find any good views or plans of the underframe. I looked through RPC
#7 but there are no clear photos. Incidentally, one of the cars I'm
modeling is the 1227 featured on pg. 17.

If anyone has any tips or photos or references, I'd appreciate
hearing about it. This is a relateively new subject for me and I'm
learning a lot. Thanks in advance for the help!
John,
The only drawings I've seen for these cars were published in the 1931,
1937, and 1940 CBCs. While they show cross sections of the underframe,
no brake parts are depicted.

You might check the images in the RP CYC Vol. 9 Addendum article as
some builder's photo show some of the brake parts.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


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


Non-Kadee Wheelsets in Kadee Trucks?

Jim Betz
 

Hi,

Since we are talking about Kadee trucks ... what is your
experience with replacing the Kadee wheelsets in a Kadee
truck?
I'm really more interested in the long term results (success
or failure or problems) than in "which wheelsets work/don't work".

Background - the Kadee wheelsets have a 'unique' axle profile.
The Kadee trucks are metal side frames. I suspect that the Kadee
trucks have a profile in the side frame that is designed to work
well with their own wheelsets. I have lots of experience
with putting Kadee wheelsets in plastic (ream and they work).
And I have lots of experience with putting non KADEE wheelsets
in plastic side frames. I just haven't put any non KADEE
wheelsets in Kadee trucks - and run them for long enough to
know if it is going to work out in the long run.
I have put some in and they seem to roll and track fine - I
just don't know how that is going to prove out over time.

Why? Because I want to update my steam era freight cars
with resistor axles to support detection and the Kadee wheelsets
don't make this an easy deal. At least I haven't been able to
get a high enough yield from the conductive epoxy running all
the way across the axle.
- Jim


Re: Freight car Distribution

Aley, Jeff A
 

Out of 1042 box and auto cars in the Traud 1951 book (see www.laramiedepot.org<http://www.laramiedepot.org> ) ,
there are 72 SP cars and 4 WP cars, or 6.9% and 0.4%, respectively.

The 1950 ORER spreadsheet recently posted on STMFC shows the SP had 3.8% of the national fleet, and WP had 0.3%.

This data tells me two things:


1) The WP is not under-represented as I had previously guessed. [Translation: I was wrong!]

2) The SP is over-represented, compared to its portion of the national fleet.

Both of these data points appear to be in agreement with the G-N model, which accounts for the increased presence of "connecting roads". One does have to know that SP needs to be considered a "connecting road", while the business relationships of the WP-DRGW make the WP-UP connection a "normal" connection, without an increase in cars beyond the proportion in the national fleet.

Regards,

-Jeff


From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of SUVCWORR@aol.com
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 7:51 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Freight car Distribution



Olin,

While that is true, the question being asked is are WP boxcars over or under represented on the UP in proportion to their percentage of the national boxcar fleet. The later being the premise of the G-N hypothesis. It has noting to do with absolute numbers of cars of a given road. For example, if the WP boxcar fleet is 2% of the national fleet and the SP boxcar fleet is 5% of the national fleet, then according to the G-N hypothesis, over time not in any one instance, 2% of the non-UP boxcars in UP trains should be WP cars and 5% SP boxcars.

Rich Orr

-----Original Message-----
From: olin4812 <olin4812@yahoo.com<mailto:olin4812%40yahoo.com>>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com<mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 12, 2010 10:18 am
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Freight car Distribution

Sheer fleet size, and who physically served which customers are important
drivers. SP had a huge car fleet, and served many more customers than WP, and
these facts together would strongly contribute to SP cars being more heavily
represented on UP in the steam era than WP cars.

Olin Dirks
Omaha, NE

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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Freight car Distribution

SUVCWORR@...
 

Olin,

While that is true, the question being asked is are WP boxcars over or under represented on the UP in proportion to their percentage of the national boxcar fleet. The later being the premise of the G-N hypothesis. It has noting to do with absolute numbers of cars of a given road. For example, if the WP boxcar fleet is 2% of the national fleet and the SP boxcar fleet is 5% of the national fleet, then according to the G-N hypothesis, over time not in any one instance, 2% of the non-UP boxcars in UP trains should be WP cars and 5% SP boxcars.

Rich Orr

-----Original Message-----
From: olin4812 <olin4812@yahoo.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, Apr 12, 2010 10:18 am
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Freight car Distribution


Sheer fleet size, and who physically served which customers are important
drivers. SP had a huge car fleet, and served many more customers than WP, and
these facts together would strongly contribute to SP cars being more heavily
represented on UP in the steam era than WP cars.

Olin Dirks
Omaha, NE



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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Freight car Distribution (off list)

Michael Aufderheide
 

--- On Mon, 4/12/10, leakinmywaders <leakinmywaders@yahoo.com> wrote:






I wonder why Mike A. would use the Monon train records to validate the rarified G-N hypothesis and buy a fleet accordingly, when the has in his hands a direct empirical template for the fleet he could be aiming for--with all the assigned-service, traffic routing and car-pooling agreements and multiple other local particularities built in.
 
Chris,
 
The issue is that the amount of data I have is about 5% of the traffic over a 4 month period on one division.  I have not found the specific details you mention, but I am always looking.  These logs have given me insight into some peculiar routings for local traffic and mostly justified the G-N hypothesis for through cars.  The issue in my case is the Monon's 50% bridge traffic-the logs simply show cars moving from one division point to the next with no indication of origin or destination.  The more I study it the more clear it becomes that this very closely matches the national fleet and the list I posted comes in handy for this. These will only be half of my model cars though.  The other 200 will be the less ordinary DTI covered hoppers carrying soda ash, Monon 50ft boxcars of television cabinets, CWI gons with loco coal, and (who would have thought) hoppers of coal from North-South competitor CEI.  In other words all the cars that will make
the model reflect a particular time and place.  The other cars are filler, but it is satisfying to have a basis on which cars to model.
 
Regards,
 
Mike Aufderheide-who also owns a pair of leaky waders.
 
 




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


Re: Freight car Distribution

olin4812
 

Sheer fleet size, and who physically served which customers are important drivers. SP had a huge car fleet, and served many more customers than WP, and these facts together would strongly contribute to SP cars being more heavily represented on UP in the steam era than WP cars.

Olin Dirks
Omaha, NE


Re: Freight car Distribution (off list)

Tim O'Connor
 

Al, think about TARIFFS. A box car load from A to B could be offered
by (1) B&O, single line haul (2) PRR, single line haul (3) Alphabet Route,
multi-line haul. The railroads involved in the Alphabet Route would prefer
to use their own cars (because that conforms to AAR rules) and so this
tends to produce the over-representation. Period. No friendliness or
other emotions are involved.

Why is the subject line "off list"?

Tim O'Connor

Going back to Larry Kline's Western Maryland study, IIRC some of the other "Alphabet Route" roads were somewhat over-represented. This might be attributed to either "friendly connections" or "known traffic patterns".

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


Re: Freight car Distribution

Tim O'Connor
 

No Jeff, it's not the same thing. I'm saying the PRR/B&O thing is just
happenstance, not hostility.

Consider a shipment from Chicago to Philadelphia. Both PRR and B&O can
offer a single-line haul. Each railroad would sign on to the same tariff
for the traffic. The shipper would have no reason (most of the time) or
perhaps no option at all, to specify a routing via both roads. By normal
AAR rules, this on-line load would -prefer- to utilize a home road car.
So statistically, this increases the percentage of home road cars on-line
and decreases the percentage of the other railroad at the same time.

The PRR & B&O covered almost identical territories. Not at all like the
WP, SP and UP. After the breakup of the Harriman empire, the SP/UP were
not overly friendly -- but the Overland Route was a geographic fact of
life -- each railroad needed the other. SP's preference was to route via
the Sunset Route, but SHIPPERS could specify the other, shorter route,
and they did. The UP on the other hand, to reach northern California,
had to use SP, WP or AT&SF connections. SP and AT&SF held all the cards
as it were. The WP had a weak hand, but historical common ownership of
the WP/D&RGW/MP forged a competitive route. If WP is under-represented
on the UP (not proven AFAIK) I suspect the reasons are far more complex
than any "hostility" among the railroads.

Tim O'Connor

Tim,

I think we are actually saying almost the same thing (especially with your example
of B&O vs PRR). Another example is the UP - SP relationship in Ogden. I'll bet that
WP is under-represented on UP, and that SP is over-represented, due to the business
relationship / hostility between UP, WP, and SP.

Regards,

-Jeff


From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 4:47 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Freight car Distribution

Jeff Aley wrote

The "proximity" part of the hypothesis may also be affected by business relationships
between the railroads (some of which are friendly, and others downright hostile).
Jeff, I really doubt very much that any such skew to "friendliness" exists.
Certainly car assignments, local traffic requirements, and tendency of freight
cars to travel moderate distances (average box car shipments in the 1950's under
600 miles) alone can account for skewing of the averages without invoking some
"friendliness" factor. At the same time, in cases like B&O vs PRR, whose
territories were practically identical, the percentages may be skewed (e.g.
fewer than expected B&O cars on PRR, fewere PRR on B&O) simply because cars
loaded on those roads -tended- not to be delivered to a parallel competitor.
Of course they could be interchanged, but the skew would be away from it.

Tim O'Connor


Re: Freight car Distribution

Tim O'Connor
 

Chris,

G-N does not apply to 1969 or later. The box car fleet began an intense
era of specialization just prior to 1960, and this specialization became the
dominant mode up to the present day. Back in 1930's-1940's over 90% of all
box cars were simply "XM" -- plain ol' 40' unequipped box cars that could
be used for almost anything, and were (more or less) in a national pool
that roamed rather freely (as documented by Gilbert & Nelson & others).

NP and GN stockpiled empty box cars online prior to each year's grain rush.
Many thousands of empty home road box cars is bound to skew the numbers not
only on the NP and GN but also on other railroads (recall the Brock Corollary
to the G-N Hypothesis, that every freight train has at least one NP box car).

But I agree with your methodology, it's a smart way to model.

Tim O'Connor

Tim: I have, with a lot of help from Allen Rueter, Matt Herson, and others, built a NP database for 1969 that's whopping big now (and growing)---13419 freight car records, ca. 150 trains spread throughout 1969. Obviously it's post-steam era but certainly can help inform G-N and alternative hypotheses.

There are some obviously skewed deviations from G-N predictions in NP traffic flow, but they're all explainable based on recognized exceptions or geography. In a nutshell I'd say from the NP's point of view, there is the CBQ (way overrepresented), the GN (way underrepresented), and all others (conform more or less roughly to G-N proportions). Some other car types, in particular reefers, are very severely skewed away from national fleet proportions. The upshot is that G-N strictly pertains to such a small subset of the overall freight car fleet that Like Al Brown, I question if it's worth all this energetic argument.

I wonder why Mike A. would use the Monon train records to validate the rarified G-N hypothesis and buy a fleet accordingly, when the has in his hands a direct empirical template for the fleet he could be aiming for--with all the assigned-service, traffic routing and car-pooling agreements and multiple other local particularities built in. I use my data more like Clark Probst does. If a certain car series shows up in the database--especially multiple times--it gets priority for modeling. If a car doesn't show up in the data, it requires a fairly well-reasoned stretch (or photo evidence) to rationalize including it in my model fleet.

Chris Frissell
Polson, MT


Re: Freight car Distribution (off list)

al_brown03
 

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


There are some obviously skewed deviations from G-N predictions in > NP traffic flow, but they're all explainable based on recognized
exceptions or geography. In a nutshell I'd say from the NP's point
of view, there is the CBQ (way overrepresented), the GN (way
underrepresented), and all others (conform more or less roughly to
G-N proportions). Some other car types, in particular reefers, are
very severely skewed away from national fleet proportions. The
upshot is that G-N strictly pertains to such a small subset of the
overall freight car fleet that Like Al Brown, I question if it's
worth all this energetic argument.
Mm ... the point of my recent question to Jeff A was to define what kind of exceptions one looks for, given that exceptions are accepted to exist.

Going back to Larry Kline's Western Maryland study, IIRC some of the other "Alphabet Route" roads were somewhat over-represented. This might be attributed to either "friendly connections" or "known traffic patterns".

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


Re: Freight car Distribution

Aley, Jeff A
 

Tim,

I think we are actually saying almost the same thing (especially with your example of B&O vs PRR). Another example is the UP - SP relationship in Ogden. I'll bet that WP is under-represented on UP, and that SP is over-represented, due to the business relationship / hostility between UP, WP, and SP.

Regards,

-Jeff


From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 4:47 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Freight car Distribution



Jeff Aley wrote

The "proximity" part of the hypothesis may also be affected by business relationships
between the railroads (some of which are friendly, and others downright hostile).
Jeff, I really doubt very much that any such skew to "friendliness" exists.
Certainly car assignments, local traffic requirements, and tendency of freight
cars to travel moderate distances (average box car shipments in the 1950's under
600 miles) alone can account for skewing of the averages without invoking some
"friendliness" factor. At the same time, in cases like B&O vs PRR, whose
territories were practically identical, the percentages may be skewed (e.g.
fewer than expected B&O cars on PRR, fewere PRR on B&O) simply because cars
loaded on those roads -tended- not to be delivered to a parallel competitor.
Of course they could be interchanged, but the skew would be away from it.

Tim O'Connor


Re: Freight car Distribution (off list)

Dave Nelson
 

leakinmywaders wrote:
Tim: I have, with a lot of help from Allen Rueter, Matt Herson, and
others, built a NP database for 1969 that's whopping big now (and
growing)---13419 freight car records, ca. 150 trains spread
throughout 1969. Obviously it's post-steam era but certainly can
help inform G-N and alternative hypotheses.

There are some obviously skewed deviations from G-N predictions in NP
traffic flow, but they're all explainable based on recognized
exceptions or geography. In a nutshell I'd say from the NP's point
of view, there is the CBQ (way overrepresented), the GN (way
underrepresented), and all others (conform more or less roughly to
G-N proportions). Some other car types, in particular reefers, are
very severely skewed away from national fleet proportions. The
upshot is that G-N strictly pertains to such a small subset of the
overall freight car fleet that Like Al Brown, I question if it's
worth all this energetic argument.
Neither Tim or I had any anything to say about data from 1969... Indeed, not
much could be said by either of us post 1955-56 or there abouts. And what
we did say was about ordinary free running boxcars, not all car types. Tim
was of the opinion that ordinary flat cars were also free running and I
thought he made a decent enough case for that. I never looked into it very
much.

At any rate, it has been my opinion for many years now that the hypothesis
would loose accuracy as the general purpose boxcar fleet declined, whether
that occurred by subsitution of grain hoppers, cut lumber cars, or
commodity-dedicated equipment in larger boxcars. Which puts the mid to late
50's as my own target date for inapplicability... 1969 is in a different
universe.

Dave Nelson


Re: Freight car Distribution (off list)

leakinmywaders
 

Tim: I have, with a lot of help from Allen Rueter, Matt Herson, and others, built a NP database for 1969 that's whopping big now (and growing)---13419 freight car records, ca. 150 trains spread throughout 1969. Obviously it's post-steam era but certainly can help inform G-N and alternative hypotheses.

There are some obviously skewed deviations from G-N predictions in NP traffic flow, but they're all explainable based on recognized exceptions or geography. In a nutshell I'd say from the NP's point of view, there is the CBQ (way overrepresented), the GN (way underrepresented), and all others (conform more or less roughly to G-N proportions). Some other car types, in particular reefers, are very severely skewed away from national fleet proportions. The upshot is that G-N strictly pertains to such a small subset of the overall freight car fleet that Like Al Brown, I question if it's worth all this energetic argument.

I wonder why Mike A. would use the Monon train records to validate the rarified G-N hypothesis and buy a fleet accordingly, when the has in his hands a direct empirical template for the fleet he could be aiming for--with all the assigned-service, traffic routing and car-pooling agreements and multiple other local particularities built in. I use my data more like Clark Probst does. If a certain car series shows up in the database--especially multiple times--it gets priority for modeling. If a car doesn't show up in the data, it requires a fairly well-reasoned stretch (or photo evidence) to rationalize including it in my model fleet.

Chris Frissell
Polson, MT

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

Jeff Aley wrote

The "proximity" part of the hypothesis may also be affected by business relationships
between the railroads (some of which are friendly, and others downright hostile).
Jeff, I really doubt very much that any such skew to "friendliness" exists.
Certainly car assignments, local traffic requirements, and tendency of freight
cars to travel moderate distances (average box car shipments in the 1950's under
600 miles) alone can account for skewing of the averages without invoking some
"friendliness" factor. At the same time, in cases like B&O vs PRR, whose
territories were practically identical, the percentages may be skewed (e.g.
fewer than expected B&O cars on PRR, fewere PRR on B&O) simply because cars
loaded on those roads -tended- not to be delivered to a parallel competitor.
Of course they could be interchanged, but the skew would be away from it.

Tim O'Connor


Re: Freight car Distribution

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Mike Aufderheide wrote:
. . . I have turned the national fleet numbers into a shopping list for model cars . . . I've posted my excel sheet which includes this information and the models for as many of these cars as I could determine.
Wow, great stuff, Mike. Very interesting reading. I will see if there are any parts I can comment on in a helpful way.

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: Freight car Distribution

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Aidrian Bridgeman-Sutton wrote:
That doesn't mean Joe the Modeller can't run some peculiar mix of his own, based on a theory of his devising or just plain picking cars he likes.
This was true before Gilbert and Nelson, it's true now, and will doubtless remain true. Of course, this Joe isn't someone interested in G-N anyway, and if you told him about it, he'd look at you like you were from another galaxy.

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: NEW KADEE TRUCKS

rwitt_2000
 

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

On Apr 11, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Ed Hawkins wrote:

On Apr 11, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

As I said Kadee probably chose a 3-spring pack because it is more
obvious to modelers that that truck is different from their other
trucks -- ya know, Marketing 101. :-)
Tim,
Perhaps Sam Clarke of Kadee will provide a better explanation, but
I've
spoken to Sam about their 70-ton Barber plain-bearing truck (#566)
with
3 outboard springs. The truck is accurate for a specific 50' PS-1
box
car (built ca. early 1960s) that Kadee has plans to produce. I made
a
search of other prototype cars having trucks of similar appearance,
and
about all I could find were a few series of Greenville gondola cars
(Life-Like model). That's not to say my search was exhaustive, but
rather I limited my search to prototype cars in which reasonably
accurate models exist. It's certainly possible I've missed some.
I did a very fast, and far from exhaustive, scan of my photo
collection and found photos of many cars having AAR trucks with 3
outboard springs. Not all are Barber S-2s; some earlier ones have
Barber later motion devices; and it isn't always apparent in the
photos whether they have spring planks or not. However, trucks with
3 outboard springs are so distinctive that, for that reason alone,
having them available at all in HO scale is a big step forward. And
quite a number of the cars I found can be modeled easily (War
Emergency mill gons, ARA quad hoppers, AAR 70 ton flats, etc.) in
addition to the Greenville-design gondolas Ed cites.

Flat Cars: DL&W, Erie, GTW, Reading, Southern Pacific.

Gondolas: CNJ, Monon, Erie, NYC, Nickel Plate, Norfolk & Western,
Pennsy, Pere Marquette, Reading, Southern Pacific, Wabash, Western
Maryland

Hoppers: ATSF, Boston & Maine, Lehight Valley, MILW, N&W, Southern
Pacific

Covered Hoppers: ATSF, N&W, Pennsy.

So the Kadee trucks are much more widely useful than some list
members seem to think.

Richard Hendrickson
The B&ORR also had a larger fleet of AAR 70-ton flatcars based upon the
one designed for the ERIE.

From the Fallen Flags site:
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo8831akg.jpg

But I see that the spring pack appears to differ from that on the Kadee
truck.

http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page566.htm

Bob Witt

103081 - 103100 of 192649