Date   

Re: Congratulations

Rick Schoch <tuggernaut@...>
 

Jeez...as the author, you'd think they'd give you a free copy...
Regards,
Rick Schoch

Feb 14, 2011 11:45:24 PM, STMFC@... wrote:

Thanks Dave. I'll have to see about buying a copy.
Clark Propst

--- In STMFC@..., "daveinyuma" wrote:

Congrats to Clark Propst. VERY nice article about his technique for covered loads in this months RMC.

Dave Campbell



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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Congratulations

Clark Propst
 

Thanks Dave. I'll have to see about buying a copy.
Clark Propst

--- In STMFC@..., "daveinyuma" <drdavecampbell@...> wrote:

Congrats to Clark Propst. VERY nice article about his technique for covered loads in this months RMC.

Dave Campbell


Re: LRX Image...

MDelvec952
 

Lackawanna's big reefers from ACF were distinctive for having the straight center sill, versus the fishbelly center sill common on ACF reefers of that era.

I have some photos of these in service in the 1930s, '40s and '50s. All of the 1930s in-service photos show cars with no truss rods, including the car numbered LRX 1939 for display at the New York World's Fair and the LRX 7268 from the 1940 World's Fair (7268 is notable as the only one with an Ajax hand brake). Only photos from the 1950s show cars with truss rods. The cars with truss rods all have KV (DL&W's Keyser Valley Shops near Scranton) shop marks, which is consistent with local railroaders who claimed that Keyser Valley added the truss rods.

I have DL&W general arrangement drawings for these cars dated 1944 and 1952, and neither mentions the truss rods though one of the photos is dated 1951.

The three cars pictured during the 1950s were empty when the photo was taken, though one car is stenciled to be returned to the Nickel Plate Road at Cleveland. That car has a reweigh date KV 4-40, same as the World's Fair car. Other reweigh dates are earlier than the 1950s. The addition of truss rods should require the car to be reweighed, but it's odd that the 1944 or 1952 books don't mention the truss rods though they mention so many other less significant components, modifications, etc.

If a concrete reason for the addition off truss rods surfaces, I'd love to hear it. The downgrading of reefers on the DL&W was to use them in ice service ,which is more dense than produce. But I have seen writings and waybills that discuss bananas and potatoes as common lading, the latter moved in the winter with heater pots in the ice bunkers. It's been my hope to model one or two one day.

Mike Del Vecchio

In a message dated 02/14/11 20:56:43 Eastern Standard Time, rhendrickson@... writes:

Aha! The plot thickens! DL&W 7000 is yet another reefer design,
also (obviously) by AC&F but with a straight rolled steel center
sill. However, that underframe (especially on a reefer, typically
lightly loaded by comparison to other freight cars) would never have
needed truss rods to support it. We may get some explanation of this
confusion from Roger Hinman, who really is an expert.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: LRX Image...

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
Exactly. The two truss rods were directly under, or just on either side of, the center sill. There were no other truss rods, and the
side sills, though concealed, were apparently conventional steel angles or channels.
By the time of the 1932 ARA design, it had become evident that "side sills" played little role in structural stiffness or strength of a steel car, and they became vestigial. Center sills likewise became much more modest sections, mainly because of the large contribution of the side sheets. But even in a 1920s car without steel sheathing, deep fishbellies like the USRA underframe were overdesigned, as later analysis and tests showed. The truss rods may or may not have been really needed in cars like the LRX ones we're talking about, but no doubt they gave a sensation of comfort to old-school mechanical designers. <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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: LRX Image...

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 14, 2011, at 2:40 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

I have several photos, including builder's shots, of cars with
this odd combination of steel center sills and truss rods.
Richard Hendrickson
I'm confused Richard -- I thought that ALL truss rod equipped
cars from the 1920's onwards had steel center sills, since wooden
center sills were banned from interchange.
No you're not, Tim. that is correct.

Or did you mean to say that the use of only TWO truss rods is
the unusual feature of the LRX/MDT cars?
Exactly. The two truss rods were directly under, or just on either
side of, the center sill. There were no other truss rods, and the
side sills, though concealed, were apparently conventional steel
angles or channels.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: LRX Image...

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 14, 2011, at 2:20 PM, Matthew wrote:

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

Matt, I lay no claim to be an expert on the DL&W, even less on their
reefers, but I based that statement on the fragmentary information I
have plus the photographic evidence. I have an in-service photo of
DL&W reefer 7026 which, though no built date is visible, has all the
distinctive features of a mid-'20s AC&F wood sheathed reefer, among
them a 40-ton-USRA-style deep fishbelly center sill. I have another
photo of LRX 7218, and it is a car of quite different design with a
shallow straight steel center sill and a pair of truss rods under the
center sill which appear to be part of the original underframe
design, as the center sill would have had insufficient vertical
stiffness without them. Truss rods would, of course, have been
unnecessary on the AC&F cars. So the 7000-7299 series appears to
have consisted of cars of at least two different designs.
Richard,

I suppose that anything is possible in the composition of the LRX
fleet, especially after transferring the cars to MDT, but here's a
builder's shot of DL&W #7000, the flagship (which is in the public
domain).

http://mattforsyth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/DLW-7000.jpg

It does not have a fishbelly center sill, but rather is straight,
and at least to my eye, looks to be of the exact same construction
of that of car #7218, that I posted before. If you look closely at
#7000 you, can also read the ACF builders and repack data.
Aha! The plot thickens! DL&W 7000 is yet another reefer design,
also (obviously) by AC&F but with a straight rolled steel center
sill. However, that underframe (especially on a reefer, typically
lightly loaded by comparison to other freight cars) would never have
needed truss rods to support it. We may get some explanation of this
confusion from Roger Hinman, who really is an expert.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Southern #34364

Jason Greene
 

Just a little information about the picture and Sloss.

This particular cars could be carrying the pig to Cincinnati to steel mills there, Lenoir for company use at the foundry, Charleston or Mobile for export, or any number of foundries on the east coast. Sou/AGS and L&N were Sloss’ main company that moved their pig. Central of Georgia carried a good bit to Savannah for export as well. Most of Sloss’ pig was exported to Europe during this time. WWI changed that.

Why would it be spotted to be loaded at a Steel Mill in B’ham? Simple, they would load Pig Iron into anything that would hold it. Lots of pictures of boxcars in this era being loaded in B’ham. Also, it was not a steel mill. Sloss City Furnace never produced steel, just pig iron. It was shipped to other mills and furnaces to be made into final product. U.S.S. Fairfield and Ensley, and Republic, I believe were the only B’ham Blast Furnaces to produce Steel successfully. Sloss, Woodward, Thomas, Alice were all just Pig Iron.

Sloss did infact have their own railroad but not this early. They interchanged with the Southern, AGS, CG, L&N and Seaboard right there at the furnace. The Georgia Pacific and Sloss shared common owners into the early Southern years. I am not sure when Southern sold their stock in Sloss. The GP help a small percentage of Sloss stock. Joseph Bryan was the President of both Sloss and GP for a while.


Jason Greene

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


Re: Bohn Siphon Refrigeration System for Refrigerator Cars

mopac1 <mopac1@...>
 

A belated Thank You to all who responded on my request for this information.



Gene Semon


Re: B&O Freight Car Brown, was Re: B&O Wagontop

O Fenton Wells
 

Gentlemen, It took awhile but the topic finally came down to my level.
Scalecoat Oxide Red and Floquil Zinc Chromate Primer. Got it. I have one
more Sunshine B&O wagontop to do. This will help.
Thanks
Regards,
Fenton

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:39 PM, jim_mischke <jmischke@...> wrote:





Prior to 1945, B&O used a hand mixed paint with a ferrous oxide pigment on
its boxcars and cabooses, calling the recipe "Freight Car Brown".

Ferrous oxide is basically aged rust, a brown hue with a reddish overtone.

A genuine B&O paint chip for this color has not emerged, and color photos
of this paint in decent shape are rare. There is a newly painted wood M-15j
in a Jack Delano Kodachrome image at Galewood in Chicago at the Library of
Congress web site. I work from that.

This brown paint weathers quickly (rust paint on a rust prone steel boxcar)
into a myriad of effects. Sometimes it feels quixotic to search for the
original color when it doesn't last. Still, it would be good to start with
some documented B&O practice, however elusive.

I am looking at Tamika military model paints for inspiration, their
red-brown in particular, but will withhold judgement for the time being,
consider it research in progress.

In 1945, B&O began to specify bright red oxide commercial paints for new
cars and repairs. Ed Hawkin's ACF paint chip collection for B&O boxcar
orders shows that this transition was not uniform nor timely. Photo evidence
suggests some B&O car shops kept using freight car brown for years to paint
repaired cars.

The best paint for this B&O bright red oxide is Scalecoat Oxide Red #2002.
I will also use Floquil Zinc Chromate primer for variety.

--- In STMFC@..., O Fenton Wells <srrfan1401@...> wrote:

Gentlemen, any idea of which model paints, if any out of the bottle best
match this " Alkali Resisting Brown" ?

On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Ed Hawkins <hawk0621@...> wrote:




On Jan 28, 2011, at 10:07 PM, rwitt_2000 wrote:

I believe the post-WWII "13 States" cars should be painted oxide red
not
the earlier dark brown. Maybe Ed Hawkins can find the bill of
materials
to verify the paint specifications for the 500 class M-58a built by
AC&F
in 1947 for the B&O.
Bob,
You are correct. According to the paint sample for the M-58A 50' box
cars built by AC&F in 10-47, the cars received Pittsburgh Synthetic
paint (an oxide shade). So the switch from brown to oxide red
occurred sometime between 12-41, when the M-55A/B box cars that
received "Alkali Resisting Brown" were built, and 10-47. This oxide
shade was similar to that used by ACL, CNW, L&N, UP and others during
the postwar years.

A portion of the M-60 and M-61 50' box cars built in 1951 received an
even lighter-brighter shade of oxide red, much like the color Western
Maryland used during the 1950s, while the balance received the same
oxide shade as the M-58A cars.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins






--
Fenton Wells
3047 Creek Run
Sanford NC 27332
919-499-5545
srrfan1401@...


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



--
Fenton Wells
3047 Creek Run
Sanford NC 27332
919-499-5545
srrfan1401@...


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


Re: B&O Freight Car Brown

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Rick Aylsworth wrote:
Tiny nit, Tony and Jim. Ferrous oxide is black (Fe+2). Ferric oxide (Fe+3) is the red-brown pigment, and also rust, with Tony's caveats. Different oxidation state = different crystalline structure = different color.
True, I mistyped, reversing ferrous vs. ferric. But black ferrous oxide isn't a paint pigment. What a paint guy might call ferric oxide probably is a rather more complex material, not the chemically and structurally pure laboratory compound, nor a pure mineral.
Natural rust is a mixture of iron oxides, starting with the first film which is yellowish, followed by the familiar orange-red color (lots of ferric oxide), then darkening more and more into a really dark brown. The various iron compounds responsible for all this (relevant to freight car weathering, especially unpainted interiors of gondolas and hoppers) are complex and far beyond the scope of this list. But the color sequence is entirely relevant.

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: Soo Line boxcar help

frograbbit602
 

Tim, Garth, Bob and Gene, thank you for end photo and information.
Lester Breuer


Re: LRX Image...

ROGER HINMAN
 

The MDT disposition records show they did sell DL&W a few of the older 40 foot cars with the Bettendorf underframe during the war,probably for end of life ice service. Its plausible these cars had filled in some time with the LRX reporting marks but I have no data indicating it. I'd have to check the ORERs and see exactly how many of the original ACF were returned in the late 40s. If it was less than the number they started with, the lease may have required filling in the holes with available older cars.

Roger Hinman

On Feb 14, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Richard Hendrickson wrote:

On Feb 14, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Matthew wrote:

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

On Feb 14, 2011, at 8:59 AM, MDelvec952@... wrote:

The DL&W added truss rods to some of this batch of reefers to
stiffen the sills, and this is clearly seen in the photo
Plausible but untrue, Mike. The cars were built by MDT at a time
when both MDT reefers and New York Central box cars were equipped
with shallow steel center sills to absorb draft and buff forces and
two truss rods under the center sills to support the center of the
car. I have several photos, including builder's shots, of cars with
this odd combination of steel center sills and truss rods.

Richard,

I might be mistaken, but LRX 7218 is one of a group of original
DL&W reefers, 7000-7299, built ACF, 1925. They were white with
black hardware when built, lettered DL&W, and did NOT sport truss
rods.

It was not until they were later transfered to MDT that they were
lettered LRX, and the truss rods were applied some time thereafter.
Matt, I lay no claim to be an expert on the DL&W, even less on their
reefers, but I based that statement on the fragmentary information I
have plus the photographic evidence. I have an in-service photo of
DL&W reefer 7026 which, though no built date is visible, has all the
distinctive features of a mid-'20s AC&F wood sheathed reefer, among
them a 40-ton-USRA-style deep fishbelly center sill. I have another
photo of LRX 7218, and it is a car of quite different design with a
shallow straight steel center sill and a pair of truss rods under the
center sill which appear to be part of the original underframe
design, as the center sill would have had insufficient vertical
stiffness without them. Truss rods would, of course, have been
unnecessary on the AC&F cars. So the 7000-7299 series appears to
have consisted of cars of at least two different designs.

Richard Hendrickson

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



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


B&O Freight Car Brown, was Re: B&O Wagontop

gettheredesigns <rick@...>
 

Tiny nit, Tony and Jim. Ferrous oxide is black (Fe+2). Ferric oxide (Fe+3) is the red-brown pigment, and also rust, with Tony's caveats. Different oxidation state = different crystalline structure = different color.

With that said, the term "ferrous" has a more general meaning (outside of chemistry) of "containing iron", and that might be what the paint-specifiers intended.

Peace, Rick Aylsworth

Tiny nit, Jim, but it's the other way around. Rust is
basically ferrous oxide, though hydrated and with other compounds
also, depending on the environment and temperature of the rusting.
Ferrous oxide, like most natural oxides, is stable as is (note
I didn't say "rust"). But PAINT can weather and deteriorate, even if
its pigment is stable.

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: LRX Image...

Tim O'Connor
 

I have several photos, including builder's shots, of cars with
this odd combination of steel center sills and truss rods.
Richard Hendrickson

I'm confused Richard -- I thought that ALL truss rod equipped
cars from the 1920's onwards had steel center sills, since wooden
center sills were banned from interchange.

Or did you mean to say that the use of only TWO truss rods is
the unusual feature of the LRX/MDT cars?

Tim O'Connor


Re: LRX Image...

mforsyth127
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:


Matt, I lay no claim to be an expert on the DL&W, even less on their
reefers, but I based that statement on the fragmentary information I
have plus the photographic evidence. I have an in-service photo of
DL&W reefer 7026 which, though no built date is visible, has all the
distinctive features of a mid-'20s AC&F wood sheathed reefer, among
them a 40-ton-USRA-style deep fishbelly center sill. I have another
photo of LRX 7218, and it is a car of quite different design with a
shallow straight steel center sill and a pair of truss rods under the
center sill which appear to be part of the original underframe
design, as the center sill would have had insufficient vertical
stiffness without them. Truss rods would, of course, have been
unnecessary on the AC&F cars. So the 7000-7299 series appears to
have consisted of cars of at least two different designs.
Richard,

I suppose that anything is possible in the composition of the LRX fleet, especially after transferring the cars to MDT, but here's a builder's shot of DL&W #7000, the flagship (which is in the public domain).

http://mattforsyth.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/DLW-7000.jpg

It does not have a fishbelly center sill, but rather is straight, and at least to my eye, looks to be of the exact same construction of that of car #7218, that I posted before. If you look closely at #7000 you, can also read the ACF builders and repack data.

Matt Forsyth

Modeling the D&H Penn Division
Erie Jefferson Division
In "O" SCale, summer, 1952

http://mattforsyth.com?


Re: B&O Freight Car Brown, was Re: B&O Wagontop

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

jim_mischke wrote:
Ferrous oxide is basically aged rust, a brown hue with a reddish overtone.
Tiny nit, Jim, but it's the other way around. Rust is basically ferrous oxide, though hydrated and with other compounds also, depending on the environment and temperature of the rusting.
Ferrous oxide, like most natural oxides, is stable as is (note I didn't say "rust"). But PAINT can weather and deteriorate, even if its pigment is stable.

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: New Kadee car?

Ed Hawkins
 

On Feb 14, 2011, at 2:05 PM, lnbill wrote:

Yes those 14 railroads encompass about 10% of the Standard offset
twins ever built. Kadee chose to do a prototype variation that
eliminated doing the thousands upon thousands of cars owned by the L&N
and B&O. I won't be holding my breath they will do these.
Bill Welch
On Feb 14, 2011, at 1:46 PM, jim_mischke wrote:

Ed Hawkins has lobbied Kadee for a long time to tool up for
variations of their 50-ton open hopper. The ATSF hopper takes a minor
prototype hardware change (Wine door locks instead of Enterprise? ...
I forget now ... someone can speak up with specifics) from the basic
Kadee hopper offered before. If Kadee is warming up to variations,
maybe there are some more in the works. A B&O N-41/N-44 would be fun.
Bill and Jim,
To reply to Jim's message, Kadee offers Wine and Enterprise latch door
locks for their existing models. ATSF used Keystone Monoloc and Frisco
used Enterprise Type D.

Replying to Bill's message, I don't think it's valid to include B&O in
the statement as Jim has alluded to. The statement for L&N cars is
totally correct, and at present the Atlas model is the best HO-scale
model available to my knowledge to model at least a portion of the L&N
fleet of 50-ton AAR hoppers.

The B&O N-41 and N-44 hoppers that lacked Duryea underframes had sides
that match the Kadee model. What's required is tooling a pair of ends
with narrowly spaced vertical Z-sections that extend from the top
chords to the end sills. I realize this would be an expensive endeavor,
but we're talking about important B&O cars here! I guess it comes down
to tooling cost vs. sales potential.

The new ends applied to the existing Kadee model would account for
6,300 additional B&O prototype cars built from 1951 to 1960. Also by
adding these new ends to the Kadee model, I believe accurate models of
one series for LNE and P&S (and possibly CRP) could be offered. I still
haven't found a good end view of a CRP car (10001-10500, built 1944 by
Pressed Steel) to confirm how it was designed.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Re: LRX Image...

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 14, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Matthew wrote:

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

On Feb 14, 2011, at 8:59 AM, MDelvec952@... wrote:

The DL&W added truss rods to some of this batch of reefers to
stiffen the sills, and this is clearly seen in the photo
Plausible but untrue, Mike. The cars were built by MDT at a time
when both MDT reefers and New York Central box cars were equipped
with shallow steel center sills to absorb draft and buff forces and
two truss rods under the center sills to support the center of the
car. I have several photos, including builder's shots, of cars with
this odd combination of steel center sills and truss rods.

Richard,

I might be mistaken, but LRX 7218 is one of a group of original
DL&W reefers, 7000-7299, built ACF, 1925. They were white with
black hardware when built, lettered DL&W, and did NOT sport truss
rods.

It was not until they were later transfered to MDT that they were
lettered LRX, and the truss rods were applied some time thereafter.
Matt, I lay no claim to be an expert on the DL&W, even less on their
reefers, but I based that statement on the fragmentary information I
have plus the photographic evidence. I have an in-service photo of
DL&W reefer 7026 which, though no built date is visible, has all the
distinctive features of a mid-'20s AC&F wood sheathed reefer, among
them a 40-ton-USRA-style deep fishbelly center sill. I have another
photo of LRX 7218, and it is a car of quite different design with a
shallow straight steel center sill and a pair of truss rods under the
center sill which appear to be part of the original underframe
design, as the center sill would have had insufficient vertical
stiffness without them. Truss rods would, of course, have been
unnecessary on the AC&F cars. So the 7000-7299 series appears to
have consisted of cars of at least two different designs.


Richard Hendrickson


Congratulations

daveinyuma <drdavecampbell@...>
 

Congrats to Clark Propst. VERY nice article about his technique for covered loads in this months RMC.

Dave Campbell


B&O Freight Car Brown, was Re: B&O Wagontop

Jim Mischke
 

Prior to 1945, B&O used a hand mixed paint with a ferrous oxide pigment on its boxcars and cabooses, calling the recipe "Freight Car Brown".

Ferrous oxide is basically aged rust, a brown hue with a reddish overtone.

A genuine B&O paint chip for this color has not emerged, and color photos of this paint in decent shape are rare. There is a newly painted wood M-15j in a Jack Delano Kodachrome image at Galewood in Chicago at the Library of Congress web site. I work from that.

This brown paint weathers quickly (rust paint on a rust prone steel boxcar) into a myriad of effects. Sometimes it feels quixotic to search for the original color when it doesn't last. Still, it would be good to start with some documented B&O practice, however elusive.

I am looking at Tamika military model paints for inspiration, their red-brown in particular, but will withhold judgement for the time being, consider it research in progress.



In 1945, B&O began to specify bright red oxide commercial paints for new cars and repairs. Ed Hawkin's ACF paint chip collection for B&O boxcar orders shows that this transition was not uniform nor timely. Photo evidence suggests some B&O car shops kept using freight car brown for years to paint repaired cars.

The best paint for this B&O bright red oxide is Scalecoat Oxide Red #2002. I will also use Floquil Zinc Chromate primer for variety.

--- In STMFC@..., O Fenton Wells <srrfan1401@...> wrote:

Gentlemen, any idea of which model paints, if any out of the bottle best
match this " Alkali Resisting Brown" ?

On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Ed Hawkins <hawk0621@...> wrote:




On Jan 28, 2011, at 10:07 PM, rwitt_2000 wrote:

I believe the post-WWII "13 States" cars should be painted oxide red
not
the earlier dark brown. Maybe Ed Hawkins can find the bill of
materials
to verify the paint specifications for the 500 class M-58a built by
AC&F
in 1947 for the B&O.
Bob,
You are correct. According to the paint sample for the M-58A 50' box
cars built by AC&F in 10-47, the cars received Pittsburgh Synthetic
paint (an oxide shade). So the switch from brown to oxide red
occurred sometime between 12-41, when the M-55A/B box cars that
received "Alkali Resisting Brown" were built, and 10-47. This oxide
shade was similar to that used by ACL, CNW, L&N, UP and others during
the postwar years.

A portion of the M-60 and M-61 50' box cars built in 1951 received an
even lighter-brighter shade of oxide red, much like the color Western
Maryland used during the 1950s, while the balance received the same
oxide shade as the M-58A cars.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins

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




--
Fenton Wells
3047 Creek Run
Sanford NC 27332
919-499-5545
srrfan1401@...



98041 - 98060 of 195432