Date   

Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

Tim O'Connor
 

I agree with Bill -- as soon as I saw it, I thought this probably
is a "steering" or "radial" truck. (Don't ask me why they call them
radial.) The idea is that the axle at all times is kept 90 degrees
to the rail, which eliminates sliding on the rail that is responsible
for all the squealing we're used to hearing on curves.

Tim O'Connor

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

As for the truck, looking at the other photos it seems that there is some
sort of cable system to control sideframe pivot. I seem to recall seeing
these photos in print somewhere.... Bill Schneider


Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This? Date?

water.kresse@...
 

Collection pins down the photo date somewhere between 1870 and 1948.



Al Kresse

----- Original Message -----
From: "soolinehistory" <destorzek@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Tuesday, February 8, 2011 12:43:18 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?



--- In STMFC@..., "Bill Schneider" <bschneider424@...> wrote:

There are a number of photos of this truck in the Diver collection, including
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739524144/in/set-72157621743681242/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3738733693/in/set-72157621743681242/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739532930/in/set-72157621743681242/

Frist, as Richard H. points out, the dates are misleading. They refer to the lifespan of the photographer, DeForest Diver. Diver was an engineer on the O&W and also an avid photographer. He also seems to have a bit of inventor in him, holding a patent (http://nyow.org/diver.html)

As for the truck, looking at the other photos it seems that there is some sort of cable system to control sideframe pivot. I seem to recall seeing these photos in print somewhere....

Bill Schneider
Richard,

The location in the collection materials is given as, "1948/Box 3/Folder 79/18". 1948 seems plausible.

Bill,

If you look in the middle photo you cite, you can see the cable, and the last photo makes it pretty obvious that the cable runs under the central casting that the bolster bears upon, then up to the other spring housing, although we can't tell if the enclosed springs are steel or rubber.

Dennis


Re: Ventilated Box Cars

David Sieber
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Dave Evans" wrote: "I have found the CofG historical order page - it shows the ventilators as still available."

Dave, while I can't help you with ventilator models, I did find an interesting photo of NP 23, a 2-8-0 switching a very mixed train including a CofG ventilator. Although a "panorama of unknown NP yard ... circa 1950" that doesn't show much detail, it does show that southern railroads' ventilator boxcars did travel into the northern tier of what looks like the prairie states (eastern Rockies?). Go to http://muse.museum.montana.edu/rvndb/rvnjpeg_img_rec.php?objno=RVN24579
(if that link doesn't work, try searching http://muse.museum.montana.edu/rvndb/ for image RVN24579). This photo is from the extensive Ron V. Nixon Collection posted online (11753 images and data records so far) by the Museum of the Rockies, Montana State University, Bozeman MT. Friendly warning - don't start searching the Nixon Collection archive unless you have hours to enjoy it ...
Regards, Dave Sieber, Reno NV


Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

soolinehistory <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Bill Schneider" <bschneider424@...> wrote:

There are a number of photos of this truck in the Diver collection, including
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739524144/in/set-72157621743681242/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3738733693/in/set-72157621743681242/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739532930/in/set-72157621743681242/

Frist, as Richard H. points out, the dates are misleading. They refer to the lifespan of the photographer, DeForest Diver. Diver was an engineer on the O&W and also an avid photographer. He also seems to have a bit of inventor in him, holding a patent (http://nyow.org/diver.html)

As for the truck, looking at the other photos it seems that there is some sort of cable system to control sideframe pivot. I seem to recall seeing these photos in print somewhere....

Bill Schneider
Richard,

The location in the collection materials is given as, "1948/Box 3/Folder 79/18". 1948 seems plausible.

Bill,

If you look in the middle photo you cite, you can see the cable, and the last photo makes it pretty obvious that the cable runs under the central casting that the bolster bears upon, then up to the other spring housing, although we can't tell if the enclosed springs are steel or rubber.

Dennis


Re: Oil extraction

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Rick Aylsworth wrote:
Seems to me that if they used the bottom outlet, they would have to open the dome anyway to let air in as the tank emptied. And unless the tank was up on a trestle or was draining into an underground tank, they'd still have to pump it. So why mess with uncapping the bottom outlet, hooking up a hose, and opening the valve, when it could all be done through the dome?
Rick, the tank doesn't just drain when you open the bottom outlet pipe. There is a valve inside the tank which has to be opened. The handwheel to operate that valve is up in the dome, so you have to open the dome to open the valve anyway.
I don't see why it's a lot of work to hook up a hose to the bottom outlet. We're talking minutes, and no pump is required.

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: 1948 ACF STANDARDIZED WELDED BOXCAR

William Keene <wakeene@...>
 

Hello Ed and Group,

Thank you for your reply. I guess a kit may be in our future... if... one can hold one's breath long enough. We can always hope.

Happy Modeling,
Bill Keene
Irvine, CA


On Feb 8, 2011, at 9:05 AM, Ed Hawkins wrote:


On Feb 8, 2011, at 10:46 AM, billkeene2004 wrote:

In the September, 1990, issue of Mainline Modeler magazine there is
an article with photos about the ACF Standardized Welded Boxcar. Has
this boxcar ever been offered as a kit in HO Scale?
Bill,
Unfortunately no. While the cars were "standardized" there were three
different door openings (6', 7', and 8'), each of which changed the
side panel spacing. There were also 4 ends that were used on ACF welded
box cars, 3 of which have been offered by Branchline Trains. Some ACF
standardized box cars used proprietary ACF Corrugated Ends and others
used what is called an ACF Riveted Roof, which had a double corrugation
on the roof panels much like the roof used by Armour as discussed in RP
CYC Vol. 21. Other ACF welded box cars used more common Murphy panel or
diagonal panel roofs. Now that Atlas has the Branchline tooling,
perhaps they can be convinced to produce some welded-side box cars.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins

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



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


Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

William Keene <wakeene@...>
 

Hello Group,

There are a couple of more photos of this truck in the set of photos on the Flickr site. One of these is a detail photo of one end of the truck frame. In it one can see what looks to be a cable that appears to be connected to some type of springing media -- perhaps rubber, perhaps an air bladder. This cable then extends the length of the truck, passing under a casting attached to the bolster, then up to the opposite upper corner and its springing media.

Overall, an interesting truck.

Cheers,
Bill Keene
Irvine, CA

On Feb 8, 2011, at 9:12 AM, Brian Paul Ehni wrote:

If you look closely at the left side of the truck, there appears to be a
bar running thru the U section, continuing under the center of the
sideframe, thence to the other cylinder. In the absence of obvious
springs, and what looks to be rubber absorbers in those cylinders, I think
they act as the springs for the truck.

--
Thanks!

Brian Paul Ehni

From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 08:49:18 -0800
To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Richard Wilkens wrote:

From the Cornell University collection:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739520322/in/
set-72157621743681242/
An experimental truck of some sort, Richard, as I've never seen
evidence of a truck of this design in revenue service. And the
dating is wildly incorrect, as both the side frames and bolster are
steel castings, technology that wasn't developed until decades after
1870. Cast steel U-section side frames weren't introduced until the
1920s. As to the function of those cylindrical housings above the
journal boxes, I can only speculate - so I won't.

Richard Hendrickson

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


Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

Bill Schneider
 

There are a number of photos of this truck in the Diver collection, including
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739524144/in/set-72157621743681242/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3738733693/in/set-72157621743681242/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739532930/in/set-72157621743681242/

Frist, as Richard H. points out, the dates are misleading. They refer to the lifespan of the photographer, DeForest Diver. Diver was an engineer on the O&W and also an avid photographer. He also seems to have a bit of inventor in him, holding a patent (http://nyow.org/diver.html)

As for the truck, looking at the other photos it seems that there is some sort of cable system to control sideframe pivot. I seem to recall seeing these photos in print somewhere....

Bill Schneider

From: Richard Hendrickson
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 11:49 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] OK, What Kind of Truck is This?


On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Richard Wilkens wrote:

From the Cornell University collection:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739520322/in/
set-72157621743681242/
An experimental truck of some sort, Richard, as I've never seen
evidence of a truck of this design in revenue service. And the
dating is wildly incorrect, as both the side frames and bolster are
steel castings, technology that wasn't developed until decades after
1870. Cast steel U-section side frames weren't introduced until the
1920s. As to the function of those cylindrical housings above the
journal boxes, I can only speculate - so I won't.

Richard Hendrickson







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


Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

Brian Paul Ehni <behni@...>
 

If you look closely at the left side of the truck, there appears to be a
bar running thru the U section, continuing under the center of the
sideframe, thence to the other cylinder. In the absence of obvious
springs, and what looks to be rubber absorbers in those cylinders, I think
they act as the springs for the truck.

--
Thanks!

Brian Paul Ehni



From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 08:49:18 -0800
To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] OK, What Kind of Truck is This?








On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Richard Wilkens wrote:

From the Cornell University collection:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739520322/in/
set-72157621743681242/
An experimental truck of some sort, Richard, as I've never seen
evidence of a truck of this design in revenue service. And the
dating is wildly incorrect, as both the side frames and bolster are
steel castings, technology that wasn't developed until decades after
1870. Cast steel U-section side frames weren't introduced until the
1920s. As to the function of those cylindrical housings above the
journal boxes, I can only speculate - so I won't.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: 1948 ACF STANDARDIZED WELDED BOXCAR

Ed Hawkins
 

On Feb 8, 2011, at 10:46 AM, billkeene2004 wrote:

In the September, 1990, issue of Mainline Modeler magazine there is
an article with photos about the ACF Standardized Welded Boxcar. Has
this boxcar ever been offered as a kit in HO Scale?
Bill,
Unfortunately no. While the cars were "standardized" there were three
different door openings (6', 7', and 8'), each of which changed the
side panel spacing. There were also 4 ends that were used on ACF welded
box cars, 3 of which have been offered by Branchline Trains. Some ACF
standardized box cars used proprietary ACF Corrugated Ends and others
used what is called an ACF Riveted Roof, which had a double corrugation
on the roof panels much like the roof used by Armour as discussed in RP
CYC Vol. 21. Other ACF welded box cars used more common Murphy panel or
diagonal panel roofs. Now that Atlas has the Branchline tooling,
perhaps they can be convinced to produce some welded-side box cars.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Re: OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Richard Wilkens wrote:

From the Cornell University collection:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cornelluniversitylibrary/3739520322/in/
set-72157621743681242/
An experimental truck of some sort, Richard, as I've never seen
evidence of a truck of this design in revenue service. And the
dating is wildly incorrect, as both the side frames and bolster are
steel castings, technology that wasn't developed until decades after
1870. Cast steel U-section side frames weren't introduced until the
1920s. As to the function of those cylindrical housings above the
journal boxes, I can only speculate - so I won't.

Richard Hendrickson


1948 ACF STANDARDIZED WELDED BOXCAR

billkeene2004 <wakeene@...>
 

Hello Group,

In the September, 1990, issue of Mainline Modeler magazine there is an article with photos about the ACF Standardized Welded Boxcar. Has this boxcar ever been offered as a kit in HO Scale?

Thank You, in advance, for any information.

Happy Modeling
Bill Keene
Irvine, CA


Re: Oil extraction

Benjamin Hom
 

Dennis Storzek wrote:
"Tom, your information is very factual, and undoubtedly entirely correct for the

current era, but it seems that most, if not all, oil unloading cranes used at
the small bulk plants during the steam era had their own suction line arranged
to drop into the tank through the manway, whereupon the material was pumped
out."

At any rate, when it comes to a shipment of oil, I'd rather unload through the
top instead of using the bottom connection.  Unloading through the bottom
connection means you'll end up with the water and sediment that has collected in
the bottom of the tank.


Ben Hom


Re: Oil extraction

soolinehistory <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Tom Birkett" <tnbirke@...> wrote:


Usually the eduction line is specified as being 1" off the bottom of the
car.

The dome can stay closed if the car is equipped with a vacuum relief
valve, which is basically a big check valve, but I am not sure when they
came into general use.

Tom
Tom, your information is very factual, and undoubtedly entirely correct for the current era, but it seems that most, if not all, oil unloading cranes used at the small bulk plants during the steam era had their own suction line arranged to drop into the tank through the manway, whereupon the material was pumped out.

Dennis


OK, What Kind of Truck is This?

Richard Wilkens <railsnw@...>
 


Re: Oil extraction

Clark Propst
 

Another question I have is even with tank cars of gasoline did they need to prime the line from the tank car to the pump? I was told they used gear pumps that didn't need primimg.
Clark Propst


Re: Oil extraction

Tom Birkett <tnbirke@...>
 

Jim

There are customers who want to unload out the top of the car for
(perceived) safety reasons. If they have a rack to use during unloading,
they don't have to be under the car at all, except for steam
connections, if used.If a cap on the bottom is cross threaded and won't
come off, ("I already put and 8' cheater pipe on my 36" pipe wrench and
pulled on it with a fork lift:) the top unloading option is pretty
handy. Bottom outlet valves are notorious for being trouble. If the line
that is being unloaded into is low enough and all the connections are
good and tight the car will siphon out the top after the flow is
started.

If the vapor pressure on the car is high enough sometimes no addition
pressure is required.

Usually the eduction line is specified as being 1" off the bottom of the
car.

The dome can stay closed if the car is equipped with a vacuum relief
valve, which is basically a big check valve, but I am not sure when they
came into general use.

Tom


Subject: [STMFC] Re: Oil extraction




I can only admire the ingenuity in engineering methods of heating and
otherwise preparing the contents of a tank car for pressurized pumping
of the material up and out of the dome. But why not let if flow by
gravity and added pressure and/or heating if needed out of the bottom
valve?. Why fight gravity at all, ingenious or not? Thank you in advance
for informing me. Jim here.


Re: Oil extraction

Jeff Coleman
 

The advantage of using the bottom outlet is to empty the tank. If you use the eduction pipe for off loading then there will be at least a couple of inches of product left in the tank as most eduction pipes are 2-21/2 inches off the bottom. The eduction pipe cannot go to the bottom of the tank as the diameter of the tank shell changes when the car is loaded and the pipe will make contact with the shell which in turn requires repair to the tank and or to the eduction pipe.

Jeff Coleman

--- In STMFC@..., "gettheredesigns" <rick@...> wrote:

Seems to me that if they used the bottom outlet, they would have to open the dome anyway to let air in as the tank emptied. And unless the tank was up on a trestle or was draining into an underground tank, they'd still have to pump it. So why mess with uncapping the bottom outlet, hooking up a hose, and opening the valve, when it could all be done through the dome?
Peace, Rick Aylsworth

--- In STMFC@..., "Jim Sabol" <jimsabol@> wrote:

I can only admire the ingenuity in engineering methods of heating and otherwise preparing the contents of a tank car for pressurized pumping of the material up and out of the dome. But why not let if flow by gravity and added pressure and/or heating if needed out of the bottom valve?. Why fight gravity at all, ingenious or not? Thank you in advance for informing me. Jim here.

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


Re: Oil extraction

gettheredesigns <rick@...>
 

Seems to me that if they used the bottom outlet, they would have to open the dome anyway to let air in as the tank emptied. And unless the tank was up on a trestle or was draining into an underground tank, they'd still have to pump it. So why mess with uncapping the bottom outlet, hooking up a hose, and opening the valve, when it could all be done through the dome?
Peace, Rick Aylsworth

--- In STMFC@..., "Jim Sabol" <jimsabol@...> wrote:

I can only admire the ingenuity in engineering methods of heating and otherwise preparing the contents of a tank car for pressurized pumping of the material up and out of the dome. But why not let if flow by gravity and added pressure and/or heating if needed out of the bottom valve?. Why fight gravity at all, ingenious or not? Thank you in advance for informing me. Jim here.



Re: Oil extraction

Jim Sabol
 

I can only admire the ingenuity in engineering methods of heating and otherwise preparing the contents of a tank car for pressurized pumping of the material up and out of the dome. But why not let if flow by gravity and added pressure and/or heating if needed out of the bottom valve?. Why fight gravity at all, ingenious or not? Thank you in advance for informing me. Jim here.

98301 - 98320 of 195500