Date   

Re: Tichy Rebuilt boxcar question

jerryglow2
 

It's on my modeling page: http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/modeling/SLSF_rebuilt.html Charlie recently asked me to do the decals so they're availble now along with a set for a similar ACL rebuild.

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html

--- In STMFC@..., Craig Zeni <clzeni@...> wrote:

Jerry, didn't you have photos of that car? I have a couple of the
Tichy cars and think this would make a great project for one of them...

--
Craig Zeni
Cary NC

"Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...


______________________________________________________________________
__
4e. Re: Tichy Rebuilt boxcar question
Posted by: "jerryglow@..." jerryglow@...
jerryglow2
Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:30 pm ((PDT))

I cut it off and replaced it with sheet and strip stock for mine.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@..., "Charlie D modeling the Mopac http://
mopac51.tripod" <omahaduck@> wrote:

Jerry - if I can sand off the Tichy kit's roof without too much
damage I'll use the new Frisco decals you just sent me. I'd
rather have a Frisco car than another P&LE on the layout.

Charlie Duckworth

--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@ wrote:

If it's unbuilt it makes a good basis for a Frisco 8 panel USRA
rebuild from a DS car. I just did decals for it in 3 versions
(with and w/o "Lines" in a small herald and large herald with
Frisco Fast Freight on the right. The latter started being
applied approx late '52 with possibility of the others esp w/o
"Lines" in '54.

The ACL set is also good for the same bash.

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html

--- In STMFC@..., "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@> wrote:
Unfortunately, these cars were never relettered for NYC, and
other NYC rebuilt boxcars differed in height and ends. However,
Sunshine did mini-kits (Jim Hayes Number "MK-15B", consisting of
ends, center sill, decals) converting this model to Wabash
82000-82513 boxcars equipped with auto racks. This conversion
could also be the basis for similar Wabash DS boxcar rebuilds -
see my rebuilt boxcar spreadsheet in the files section for more
Wabash possibilities.


Ben Hom


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

James Yaworsky
 

--- In STMFC@..., Andy Harman <gsgondola@...> wrote:
Is interest in the NYC in general passe'? Even as a kid, I thought of the
NYC as the "Gray Suits" of railroading - not flashy but all business,
elegant, and prosperous. I guess that doesn't translate to a modeling
interest.

Andy

You have expressed an interesting theory in a very concise and elegant matter, and as I read the "Gray Suits" sentence, I thought to myself that I've never come across a better one-liner to describe the essence of the NYC at many times in its fairly long history.

Of course, there were some not-so prosperous times, as well... Personally, I model Perlman's Road to the Future, fighting for its life, a bit run down but concentrating on the essentials and developing many innovative and exciting practices.

Also, it's hard to model 2 or 4 track mainline action in a reasonable space! It's not "quaint". No mountains. What "spectacular" scenery there is consists of massive items like a very large bridge across the wide and deep Niagara River gorge just north of the Falls etc.

However, do we really know how many layouts have actually been constructed for any given prototype railroad? How many NYC-themed model railroads exist? There's really no way of knowing, is there?

Jim Yaworsky


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS

seaboard_1966
 

Let me pipe in here if I can. I work with WrightTRAK and we were looking at doing a project, a NYC car. I contacted the NYCHS and was told, yes, they have the drawings we are looking for. We would have to purchase the CD set, I don't remember what that cost was, but it was NOT cheap. This set included all sorts of information that we did not need. Then they said that because we were using information gathered from them that we would be limited to the amount of product we could produce from those drawings. If we wanted to produce more we were obligated to pay them what amounted to a royalty to do so. You gotta be friggin kidding me. Needless to say that project did NOT get done. This is by far the most restrictive policy that we have ever come across. In this instance it cost NYC modelers a car that we are certain would have been well received and it badly needed.

Denis Blake
WrightTRAK Railroad Models.



2011 Central Ohio Prototype Modelers Meet, May 19-21

http://www.facebook.com/pages/manage/#!/pages/Central-Ohio-Prototype-Modelers-Meet/326645470797

-----Original Message-----
From: James Yaworsky
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 10:34 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

James Yaworsky wrote:
"Disclaimer: as a NYC-focused modeler, I like to see manufacturers release
> NYC-specific models.

Hate to say it, James, but this state of affairs ain't going to happen until > NYC-focused modelers come out and actively support NYC-specific freight cars, > mot only through sales, but through demonstrating through publishing research > showing why NYC freight car prototypes are important, and actively pushing > prototypes through product development and cooperation with the manufacutrers.
[snip]
None of this appears to be of any interest to the NYCSHS -[snip]
You raise some interesting questions, Ben. I've been a member of the NYCSHS now for four years and am aware that it has a history of not being noted as "modeler-friendly". I'm not sure this is true today. It may have started off as mainly an ex-employee organization but obviously as time goes by, it has become less so. I think there are a lot of misconceptions floating around about it now. I believe the current leadership is making sincere and productive efforts to change those misconceptions.

I've certainly noticed the superior quality of many of the other railroad historical society web sites as regards the information available to modelers. The NYCSHS's main efforts have been focused on the quarterly newsletter, "Headlight", and there is a lot of good information along the lines you speak of in it. However, it's mainly members of the Society who benefit from it.

It appears to me that the NYCSHS's focus is much broader than the sorts of issues that would appeal to someone who is strictly a prototype model railroader. I started off with an interest in the NYC because it was the largest railroad in my home town, Windsor, Ontario; and because I was attracted by lightening stripes, Dreyfus Hudsons, and, yes, Pacemaker boxcars etc. At that stage, I knew little of the actual history of the railroad. For example, my only thoughts about Al Perlman were probably what a jerk he was for scrapping virtually all of the Central's steam locomotive fleet.

As I learned more about the "big picture" - how the Central system evolved, how it actually operated, what it accomplished, and how it ended up in Penn Central, my views about many things evolved and changed.

My views about Mr. Perlman certainly have changed considerably. The current issue of "Headlight" has a story by a man who started his career with the Central in its sales department under Perlman. I've never seen a more concise demonstration, based on this man's actual experiences, of why Perlman was a great railroad executive and how he turned the NYC from a stodgy "status quo" road in to a dynamic organization that had in many ways "turned the corner" and might very well have survived in some form if not for the Penn Central disaster. However, I must concede this article contains virtually nothing someone entirely focused on freight car details would find interesting... Despite this "defect", I confess I *still* found it a fascinating insight in to the NYC in the 1960's.

So, the NYCSHS is not just about models and model railroading. I imagine every railroad historical society will have a mix of goals, which will include a model railroader component. The mix of historic and modeler focus is perhaps more on "historical" rather than "modeler" in the NYCSHS than it is in the PRR or many other historical societies, but it is a mix that the current NYCSHS executive has identified as being desirable to shift towards more modeling info.

I know for a fact that NYCSHS members like Terry Link have been consulted by and actively assisted manufacturers on some of the NYCS-specific models that have come out the last few years.

Although I can certainly see that a large historical society pushing for a specific model might help attract a manufacturer's attention, it would seem to me that this is more important for supporters of smaller railroads than a giant like the NYC, Pennsylvania, Union Pacific, etc. Surely the manufacturers would realize that models from the giant railways are probably going to sell. Surely the manufacturers do more than just react to pressure from "special interest" groups. If NYCS items sell, surely manufacturers notice?

I'll
bet that there was little or no support provided by NYCSHS to the BLI NYC
USRA-design steel boxcar - the single most lacking model boxcar on any HO-scale
steam era layout.
I'm not so sure about that, but don't know for sure one way or the other. Unfortunately, the NYCSHS has not been adept at blowing its own horn. I do believe it is more active in these matters than is generally supposed. This belief is based on what people like Terry Link and Rich Stoving have told me.



With all due respect to Jeff English, Roger Hinman, and Terry Link, I just don't
see a whole lot of action from the NYC crowd. Ask yourself, James - why is
there so much available for the PRR models, and so little available for the NYC?


Ben Hom
It's certainly a valid question, Ben. I just don't know the exact situation to be able to comment with authority on it - but I'm not sure anybody else does, either. All I can say for sure is that Terry Link is a personal friend and I do know for an absolute fact he's been consulted on several of the projects that have come out in the last few years.

As for the pros and cons of the NYCSHS, that's a big topic and one that is "off-topic" for this group. All I would like to say to anyone who is interested in these issues is - check it out for yourself. There's too many rumours and innuendos floating around.

If you have an interest in the NYC and want to see changes in the NYCSHS, then the only way that's going to happen is if you *join* and start getting involved. In other words, don't just grouse about it - *do* something about it!

Jim Yaworsky






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

Yahoo! Groups Links









No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3516 - Release Date: 03/19/11 03:34:00


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS

James Yaworsky
 

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

James Yaworsky wrote:
"Disclaimer: as a NYC-focused modeler, I like to see manufacturers release > NYC-specific models.

Hate to say it, James, but this state of affairs ain't going to happen until > NYC-focused modelers come out and actively support NYC-specific freight cars, > mot only through sales, but through demonstrating through publishing research > showing why NYC freight car prototypes are important, and actively pushing > prototypes through product development and cooperation with the manufacutrers. 
[snip]
None of this appears to be of any interest to the NYCSHS -[snip] 
You raise some interesting questions, Ben. I've been a member of the NYCSHS now for four years and am aware that it has a history of not being noted as "modeler-friendly". I'm not sure this is true today. It may have started off as mainly an ex-employee organization but obviously as time goes by, it has become less so. I think there are a lot of misconceptions floating around about it now. I believe the current leadership is making sincere and productive efforts to change those misconceptions.

I've certainly noticed the superior quality of many of the other railroad historical society web sites as regards the information available to modelers. The NYCSHS's main efforts have been focused on the quarterly newsletter, "Headlight", and there is a lot of good information along the lines you speak of in it. However, it's mainly members of the Society who benefit from it.

It appears to me that the NYCSHS's focus is much broader than the sorts of issues that would appeal to someone who is strictly a prototype model railroader. I started off with an interest in the NYC because it was the largest railroad in my home town, Windsor, Ontario; and because I was attracted by lightening stripes, Dreyfus Hudsons, and, yes, Pacemaker boxcars etc. At that stage, I knew little of the actual history of the railroad. For example, my only thoughts about Al Perlman were probably what a jerk he was for scrapping virtually all of the Central's steam locomotive fleet.

As I learned more about the "big picture" - how the Central system evolved, how it actually operated, what it accomplished, and how it ended up in Penn Central, my views about many things evolved and changed.

My views about Mr. Perlman certainly have changed considerably. The current issue of "Headlight" has a story by a man who started his career with the Central in its sales department under Perlman. I've never seen a more concise demonstration, based on this man's actual experiences, of why Perlman was a great railroad executive and how he turned the NYC from a stodgy "status quo" road in to a dynamic organization that had in many ways "turned the corner" and might very well have survived in some form if not for the Penn Central disaster. However, I must concede this article contains virtually nothing someone entirely focused on freight car details would find interesting... Despite this "defect", I confess I *still* found it a fascinating insight in to the NYC in the 1960's.

So, the NYCSHS is not just about models and model railroading. I imagine every railroad historical society will have a mix of goals, which will include a model railroader component. The mix of historic and modeler focus is perhaps more on "historical" rather than "modeler" in the NYCSHS than it is in the PRR or many other historical societies, but it is a mix that the current NYCSHS executive has identified as being desirable to shift towards more modeling info.

I know for a fact that NYCSHS members like Terry Link have been consulted by and actively assisted manufacturers on some of the NYCS-specific models that have come out the last few years.

Although I can certainly see that a large historical society pushing for a specific model might help attract a manufacturer's attention, it would seem to me that this is more important for supporters of smaller railroads than a giant like the NYC, Pennsylvania, Union Pacific, etc. Surely the manufacturers would realize that models from the giant railways are probably going to sell. Surely the manufacturers do more than just react to pressure from "special interest" groups. If NYCS items sell, surely manufacturers notice?

I'll
bet that there was little or no support provided by NYCSHS to the BLI NYC
USRA-design steel boxcar - the single most lacking model boxcar on any HO-scale
steam era layout.
I'm not so sure about that, but don't know for sure one way or the other. Unfortunately, the NYCSHS has not been adept at blowing its own horn. I do believe it is more active in these matters than is generally supposed. This belief is based on what people like Terry Link and Rich Stoving have told me.



With all due respect to Jeff English, Roger Hinman, and Terry Link, I just don't
see a whole lot of action from the NYC crowd.  Ask yourself, James - why is
there so much available for the PRR models, and so little available for the NYC?


Ben Hom
It's certainly a valid question, Ben. I just don't know the exact situation to be able to comment with authority on it - but I'm not sure anybody else does, either. All I can say for sure is that Terry Link is a personal friend and I do know for an absolute fact he's been consulted on several of the projects that have come out in the last few years.

As for the pros and cons of the NYCSHS, that's a big topic and one that is "off-topic" for this group. All I would like to say to anyone who is interested in these issues is - check it out for yourself. There's too many rumours and innuendos floating around.

If you have an interest in the NYC and want to see changes in the NYCSHS, then the only way that's going to happen is if you *join* and start getting involved. In other words, don't just grouse about it - *do* something about it!

Jim Yaworsky


Re: Tichy Rebuilt boxcar question

Craig Zeni
 

Jerry, didn't you have photos of that car? I have a couple of the Tichy cars and think this would make a great project for one of them...

--
Craig Zeni
Cary NC

"Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...

______________________________________________________________________ __
4e. Re: Tichy Rebuilt boxcar question
Posted by: "jerryglow@..." jerryglow@... jerryglow2
Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:30 pm ((PDT))

I cut it off and replaced it with sheet and strip stock for mine.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@..., "Charlie D modeling the Mopac http:// mopac51.tripod" <omahaduck@...> wrote:

Jerry - if I can sand off the Tichy kit's roof without too much damage I'll use the new Frisco decals you just sent me. I'd rather have a Frisco car than another P&LE on the layout.

Charlie Duckworth

--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@ wrote:

If it's unbuilt it makes a good basis for a Frisco 8 panel USRA rebuild from a DS car. I just did decals for it in 3 versions (with and w/o "Lines" in a small herald and large herald with Frisco Fast Freight on the right. The latter started being applied approx late '52 with possibility of the others esp w/o "Lines" in '54.

The ACL set is also good for the same bash.

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html

--- In STMFC@..., "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@> wrote:
Unfortunately, these cars were never relettered for NYC, and other NYC rebuilt boxcars differed in height and ends. However, Sunshine did mini-kits (Jim Hayes Number "MK-15B", consisting of ends, center sill, decals) converting this model to Wabash 82000-82513 boxcars equipped with auto racks. This conversion could also be the basis for similar Wabash DS boxcar rebuilds - see my rebuilt boxcar spreadsheet in the files section for more Wabash possibilities.


Ben Hom


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

Bruce Smith
 

Andy,

A car assigned to LCL service does not need a tare weight as the shipper
is not being charged by the carload. The lack of this data on the car
side would also indicated to a shipper that the car could not be used
for carload shipments based on weight.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

Andy Harman <gsgondola@...> 03/18/11 11:49 PM >>>
At 07:31 AM 3/18/2011 -0700, you wrote:

It does not. The dead giveaway is the lack of dimensional data and LT
WT
stencil.
Why was this information omitted? Just to prevent interchange? Not
like
there's any great expense involved in providing it.

Andy



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

Yahoo! Groups Links


New Location for Napervill RPM Meet

Rhbale@...
 

RPM-Naperville has found a new home.
The 2011 event will be held October 20-22 at the Hickory Ridge Marriott in
Lisle, Illinois. (call 630-971-5000 for reservations). Lisle is located
about 5 miles east of downtown Naperville.

Richard Bale
News Editor
Read Model Railroad Hobbyist magaZine, its always FREE at
_www.mrhmag.com_ (http://www.mrhmag.com)


Re: MCB or ARA Stencil Drawings

Thomas Birkett
 

Charlie

I returned home today after getting into Kansas City on No. 4 and driving to
Bartlesville.

My "Standards" is newer than I thiught, 1975. But it had no lettering fints
in it.

Sorry

Tom


Subject: [STMFC] MCB or ARA Stencil Drawings




Does anyone have digital copies of or refences for MCB or ARA stencil
drawings for alpha and numeric characters?
I've been searching for CB&Q "Railroad Roman" stencil drawings and found a
reference for such lettering as ARA rather than a CB&Q drawing number.
So far I've not been able to find MCB or ARA drawings, but I've seen them in
the past.....
Thanks,
Charlie Vlk


Georgia & Florida LOs

Frank Valoczy <destron@...>
 

Hi!

I recently saw a photo (scan of a slide, rather poor quality, i.e. very
small) of a strange-looking Georgia & Florida covered hopper:

http://www.ttnut.com/resources/image/2659

Possibly this is of a car in G&F 12076-12085 series... does anyone have
any further info on this cars?

Thanks,

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

dgconnery@sbcglobal.net <dgconnery@...>
 

This discussion has been quite interesting. I think it points out the risks of assuming everything worked by the book on a railroad. What the bosses put out in proclamations were not always followed to the letter.

I worked in the telegraph office of the NYC in Albany, NY from March 1956 to September 1958. At the time there was a lot of internal promotion of the NYC's Pacemaker service in company literature. I also remember a series of messages being fired back and forth between someone in a position in one of the yards and a freight agent at a local town about putting inappropriate loads in Pacemaker cars. The messages were noteworthy in that both parties seemed really upset by the whole thing. It didn't make a lot of sense to me at the time and when I talked with others in the office they just laughed at it as some new hire college kid at the yard trying to everything by the book.

It is easy to visualize a local agent sending a group of cars to a good shipper, some Pacemaker cars for that service and some regular boxcars for shipments off the system. If the customer's wharehouse men get shipments loaded in the wrong type cars, what is the local agent to do when a Pacemaker car comes back from the shipper consigned to an off system location. Does he send it back to the shipper to get it unloaded and then reloaded in the correct car? probably not.

The business had to get done despite the published practices.

Dave Connery


Re: Weathering Couplers

Andy Harman
 

First, I forgot to thank everyone who responded on this topic. I suspected
that my problem was more one of practice than technique, as most of you are
using the same basic methods I've already used... I just keep getting paint
where it's not supposed to be, and I've not had good results trying to
unstick a coupler once the jaw motion is impeded. Rarely do I have any
problem with the centering motion, just the jaw being either stuck or more
commonly, the action on it becmes to stiff for the spring to operate it.
About 40% of the time I can work it back and forth and get it going, but
seems like half of those stick again down the road after I've forgotten
about them.

I just painted a couple last night using a small brush and Floquil roof
brown straight from the bottle. So far so good. I also painted them
before mounting them, which allows me to better see what I'm doing and
control the flow of the paint. I will probably vary the colors and mix but
I think I'm better off using Floquil (as opposed to an acrylic) just
because it is easier to control and if it does get into the hinge, it
should be easier to work it back out. Thanks again for the suggestions.

Andy


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

Andy Harman
 

At 07:31 AM 3/18/2011 -0700, you wrote:

It does not.  The dead giveaway is the lack of dimensional data and LT WT
stencil.
Why was this information omitted? Just to prevent interchange? Not like
there's any great expense involved in providing it.

Andy


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

Andy Harman
 

At 07:26 AM 3/18/2011 -0700, you wrote:
With all due respect to Jeff English, Roger Hinman, and Terry Link, I just
don't
see a whole lot of action from the NYC crowd.  Ask yourself, James - why is
there so much available for the PRR models, and so little available for
the NYC?

I've never understood why there is so little interest in the NYC in
Cincinnati. It was one of 7 original major railroads to serve the city,
and in terms of making its presence known, perhaps wasn't #1 but was no
worse than #3. We have a very active cadre of modelers of the PRR, B&O,
C&O, L&N, Southern, and N&W but there are exactly five NYC modelers in the
area that I know of... myself and my brother, who are only part time NYC
and have other interests. One of the guys is a brass collector, one
doesn't own a phone, and the other has pretty much gotten out of the hobby.
Cincinnati isn't on the Hudson River, but it is one of the Big Four, steam
was active here right up to the end.

Is interest in the NYC in general passe'? Even as a kid, I thought of the
NYC as the "Gray Suits" of railroading - not flashy but all business,
elegant, and prosperous. I guess that doesn't translate to a modeling
interest.

Andy


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

pullmanboss <tcmadden@...>
 

Pat Wilkinson:

The NYC group is funny that way, I have been a member for years
and from what several of my friends and I can tell if you live
west of the Hudson River you don't really count.
From comments made on the Passenger Car List over the years I gather there was a time when the "old heads" who dominated the NYCHS had little use for modelers and their interests.

Tom Madden


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

Patrick Wilkinson <glgpat@...>
 

Ben,



The NYC group is funny that way, I have been a member for years and from
what several of my friends and I can tell if you live west of the Hudson
River you don't really count.



I was wondering if that picture of the Pacemaker car could be a simple case
of the wrong car got on the wrong train? We all know that never happens . .
. .



Pat Wilkinson


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Mar 18, 2011, at 7:02 PM, Gene wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "al_brown03" <abrown@...> wrote:

Remind me please, someone: what "dimensional" data did the AAR
require for interchange? Just LD LMT and LT WT as on the Pacemaker
cars in RP CYC 8, or was there supposed to be more?
-- tia --
-- Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.
Al,
I don't believe anyone directly answered your question.

In Section 3, FREIGHT CAR CONSTRUCTION of each Car Builders'
Cyclopedia there is "A.A.R. [or A.R.A.] Standards, Lettering and
Marking" near the beginning with illustrations showing the required
lettering for different types of freight cars. These are large,
easy to read drawings.

(Photos are better for lettering models, of course, but these
drawings could be used in the absence of a photo. Doing so would
almost certainly guarantee that someone would immediately come up
with a photo proving said lettering to be wrong.)

The correct source, because it is updated at least annually and in
most years more often than that, is the Interchange Rules but there
are few or no illustrations, just text.

Absolute statements that the lack of required stenciling makes
interchange impossible are not exactly correct, close but not
quite. The interchange rules give the receiving railroad the right
to refuse to accept a car not in compliance if the receiving
railroad chooses to do so. They can also accept such a car.

As a practical matter, the most likely instance of interchanging a
car not in compliance with interchange rules is inside a switching
district where a switching line may hand off a car not in
compliance to another railroad for delivery within that same
switching district.

The two paragraphs above are going to get me into trouble so I'll
be ducking for cover as soon as I hit 'send.'

Truth be told, it would take a bevy of Philadelphia lawyers to
figure out all the interchange rules. That is why you will find a
Code of Car Service Rules and Interpretations in every Equipment
Register and why the ARA/AAR has an Arbitration Committee and why
there is a long list of Arbitration Committee Decisions in each
annual Proceedings of the ARA/AAR Mechanical Division or
predecessor organizations.

Gene Green
Ducking for cover now ;-)
No need to duck for cover, Gene. That is as clear a statement of the
facts as could reasonably be made. Of course the interchange rules
weren't always absolutely enforced to the letter of the law, since it
was the receiving railroad's responsibility to do so, and an official
who could exercise that responsibility wasn't always on the scene.
On the other hand, the rules weren't merely trivial and were not to
be ignored with impunity. Certainly there is evidence of violations,
but such violations were rare. For example, I have a W. C. Whittaker
photo of an Illinois Northern box car in Oakland CA clearly stenciled
"not to be operated off IN rails." But you can be sure that whoever
allowed that car to be loaded for an off-line destination got called
on the carpet.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Foreign Road Stock Cars

Thomas Birkett
 

I wonder if SIT, "Storage in Transit" was in place? If so the original bill-of -lading might be used. In this way a through rate would apply, from origin to destination even though there might be a storage period of some duration in the middle of the move. This worked for grain in the era before 1960 and after. "Milling in transit" was similar for wheat and other products, mostly agricultural
 
Tom

--- On Fri, 3/18/11, Tim O'Connor <@timboconnor> wrote:


From: Tim O'Connor <@timboconnor>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Foreign Road Stock Cars
To: STMFC@...
Date: Friday, March 18, 2011, 3:46 PM


 



Dave

It's a good question. I don't know about livestock flows, but it does
seem to me that many urban stockyards were far larger than required for
the local market (i.e. slaughterhouses). So I assume that the largest
stockyards like Omaha, KC, Chicago, Denver were intermediate points for
stock to be SOLD either to slaughterhouses, or to brokers. And if they
were sold to brokers, then wouldn't they be shipped on a new bill of
lading to another stockyard? But railroad stock pens like Laramie WY
or places like that probably were for resting and feeding only, and
the livestock probably were reloaded into the same cars on the same
bill of lading.

The 28 hour rule limited the distance that could be covered between
rests -- maybe 500 miles (e.g. Omaha-Chicago) on a good day.

Which doesn't really explain foreign stock cars, does it? :-) Just be
mindful that not all stock cars were loaded with livestock. Some might
be loaded with lumber, or fresh tomatoes (PRR short hauls to Campbells
in Camden NJ), or even coal!

Tim O'Connor

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

I do not want to re-open the entire fleet balance debate, but I have not yet researched what a viable mix of stock cars would be on a PRR stock train (e.g. Man-of-war) in central Pennsylvania (after resting the east bound animals at Herr Island in Pittsburgh).

I guess the generic question is, once a stock car is loaded with stock that is destined for a specific location, could that car be replaced when the stock was removed for rest/feeding/car cleaning at an intermediate location, or would the car and its stock go all the way to the destination?

I would think this would govern whether western road stock cars make it east of Herr Island. I need to start identifying what models to buy.

Are there any era dependencies? I am modeling WWII.

Thanks,
Dave Evans







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


Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC

Gene <bierglaeser@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "al_brown03" <abrown@...> wrote:

Remind me please, someone: what "dimensional" data did the AAR require for interchange? Just LD LMT and LT WT as on the Pacemaker cars in RP CYC 8, or was there supposed to be more?
-- tia --
-- Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.
Al,
I don't believe anyone directly answered your question.

In Section 3, FREIGHT CAR CONSTRUCTION of each Car Builders' Cyclopedia there is "A.A.R. [or A.R.A.] Standards, Lettering and Marking" near the beginning with illustrations showing the required lettering for different types of freight cars. These are large, easy to read drawings.

(Photos are better for lettering models, of course, but these drawings could be used in the absence of a photo. Doing so would almost certainly guarantee that someone would immediately come up with a photo proving said lettering to be wrong.)

The correct source, because it is updated at least annually and in most years more often than that, is the Interchange Rules but there are few or no illustrations, just text.

Absolute statements that the lack of required stenciling makes interchange impossible are not exactly correct, close but not quite. The interchange rules give the receiving railroad the right to refuse to accept a car not in compliance if the receiving railroad chooses to do so. They can also accept such a car.

As a practical matter, the most likely instance of interchanging a car not in compliance with interchange rules is inside a switching district where a switching line may hand off a car not in compliance to another railroad for delivery within that same switching district.

The two paragraphs above are going to get me into trouble so I'll be ducking for cover as soon as I hit 'send.'

Truth be told, it would take a bevy of Philadelphia lawyers to figure out all the interchange rules. That is why you will find a Code of Car Service Rules and Interpretations in every Equipment Register and why the ARA/AAR has an Arbitration Committee and why there is a long list of Arbitration Committee Decisions in each annual Proceedings of the ARA/AAR Mechanical Division or predecessor organizations.

Gene Green
Ducking for cover now ;-)


Re: Foreign Road Stock Cars (was Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC)

Greg Martin
 

Dave wrote:

"Greg,

I do not want to re-open the entire fleet balance debate, but I have not yet researched what a viable mix of stock cars would be on a PRR stock train (e.g. Man-of-war) in central Pennsylvania (after resting the east bound animals at Herr Island in Pittsburgh).

I guess the generic question is, once a stock car is loaded with stock that is destined for a specific location, could that car be replaced when the stock was removed for rest/feeding/car cleaning at an intermediate location, or would the car and its stock go all the way to the destination?

I would think this would govern whether western road stock cars make it east of Herr Island. I need to start identifying what models to buy.

Are there any era dependencies? I am modeling WWII.

Thanks,
Dave Evans"




I did a little research on the rail miles (current no era specific) and it shows that CHGO to Newark, NJ (not exactly the slaughter houses) show to be 898 miles (Greenville Docks, NJ is the same). If I do the math using 21 miles per hour as the rule (stock would/should move faster than manifest freight) then it would take approximately 43 hours to make the move and would be outside the AAR rules and thus the stock would have to be rested and feed at Herr Island, PA (Pittsburgh, PA). But AAR records show during the WW2 era that train speeds were higher than in most other eras. I believe when it comes to Herr Island you have to think in terms of first in first out...

But in my era of the mid 50s photo evidence shows that (dare I say this) most cars returning west (great shots crossing the Rockville Bridge) were of western origin, not all just most. One need only search the pages of the Don Ball books as well as the Don Wood's book to see that there was less than one would expect of home road cars. I have found good evidence that the UP cars held down a tremendous amount of the business (related to car supply) and an abnormally low amount of PRR cars show up. I was inspired to do my Shake N Take UP S-40-10 car in DLS paint based on a photo in Don Wood's book taken on the Middle Div. trailing an L&N Mathers stock car, trailing a PRR Mountain headed west. Then in the late fifties as the PRR began to take the stock business more seriously and with the rebuilding program to the K9 and K11 program the worm turns so to say. We (SPF's) all realize that this business supported the fledgling Truc/Trailer Train program. In my stock car fleet it is doubtful that I will even bother to represent a PRR car in my empty/loaded car fleet.

I have never done more than photo research and would love to see the accounting records during the transition era to see exactly where the PRR K class cars derived there per diem as they just don't really show up in on line photos other than parked... go figure.and the then compare the off line cars accounting schedules.

Greg Martin


Re: EJ&E #7300-7799 USRA Re-Builds #7300-7799

Paul Lyons
 

I want to thank all the folks that sent me photos of the above referenced cars. It has allowed me to finish the model in great accurate detail, except for one remaining thing---were the running boards metal or wood. John LaRue provided me with a 8x10 of the photo of #7566 in the May 1990 issue of Model railroading and Steve Hoxie sent me a photo of #7494 taken from about the same 3/4 view. Both photos seem to indicate the running board and lateral walks are metal by how thin they are at the edges. When I magnify the LaRue photo there is clearly light passing through the running board, but the photo is not sharp enough to discern any shape. So, one last request--does anybody have a EJ&E diagram book that might solve this mystery?
I really do not want to guess the running board type unless I have to finish the model.
Thanks again!
Paul Lyons


Subject: [STMFC] EJ&E #7300-7799 USRA Re-Builds

I am finishing one of the early Sunshine kits of a EJ&E USRA re-build, series #7300-7799, and as usual the kit is fairly crude with minmal instructions and prototype info. I have found a small photo in the May 1990 issue of Model Railroading that will answer most of my questions, however, it is a typical magazine image and hard to read. So does anyone have copy of this photo that they can share with a scan. The car in the photo is road number #7566. It is a 3/4 view shot from left side of the B end and is identified as a R.C. Feld photo, John C. La Rue Collection.
The only question this photo will not answer is what type running board these cars were equiped with when re-built in the late 30's. I suspect wood based on that date, but Sunshine put a metal (resin) running board in the kit.

Any and all help is appreicated!
Paul Lyons

[

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity: New Members 1
Visit Your Group


Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use



.






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