Not all of them, Mike. The 8/47 ORER showed more than 4.600 box cars still under CCC&StL reporting marks, and 53 were still listed as Big Four cars in 10/50. NYC was apparently in no great hurry to

Rob, I have many photos, including close-ups I took myself. Those castings were inserted in the outer frame sills to clear the wheels when the cars with new bodies had the underframes lowered so they

Ben Hom writes: "- Fact: Built in 1923 as CCC&STL 66843-66899, these cars were renumbered starting in 1936 to NYC 849843-849899. The Big 4 number series persisted until 1946." "- Assumption: Cars

Silly question. Why don't you make it an M&StL hopper Gene? Clark Propst

Gene Green asked: And if I do go ahead [and build my USRA twin hopper kit as a NYC car], should the car be black and heavily weathered or freight car red and more lightly weathered? I model September

Hi to all Sorry to change the subject but I am building my second Sunshine kit and I need a bit of assistance. The kit is 73.1 which is the Santa Fe Fe7-Fe20 classes of Automobile cars. In the

Ben, I model September 1950. Gene Green

The NYCHS drawings are fairly complete for the hopper cars built in the late 1920s through the early 1960s at least at the General Arrgt and Brake Arrgt level. As mentioned getting a fairly complete

The NYCHS offers a cd containing scans of original NYC engineering drawings -- one set for hoppers, other sets for other things. Normally several drawings per car are needed to get the whole picture

Gene Green wrote: "This is embarrassing but I realize now that none of the 3 NYC hopper cars in the 1948 list are USRA hoppers, rebuilt or original. I remain grateful to all who provided information.

Doug Harding wrote: "In the 1948 list these were the three NYC hoppers known to be on the M&StL: NYC 818467, NYC 849899, NYC 863803" NYC 818467, NYC 818325-818900, Lot

This is embarrassing but I realize now that none of the 3 NYC hopper cars in the 1948 list are USRA hoppers, rebuilt or original. I remain grateful to all who provided information. Because of all

Doug Harding wrote: Well said, Doug. Girder bridges in particular have length to depth proportions which depend on loading, for obvious reasons. Paul Mallery's bridge book (Carstens) lays all

Hi Bob, Norm has been out to St. Louis RPM for a number of years. Great guy, and he brings a great series of products to the market. He will do custom work--he produced some SAL decals for me for an

The "mushroom system" Bob mentions incorporated a funnel shaped top on each concrete column, so that thin deck actually has much more support than is evident from the view looking down. The Same

Read http://skyscraper.org/EXHIBITIONS/VERTICAL_URBAN_FACTORY/concrete.php for more about Turner and his mushroom system. Basically he discovered that if you flare out the top of a concrete column, ie

Hi Tim, I had the same thought as you when I was looking at the prototype bridge. It's not the only one (now gone) in that part of town that seems very thin to my eyes. It could be my model

Very impressive! Bob can you describe the under-structure of that road bridge? I'm amazed by the shallow depth of the prototype bridge seen from the side. Of course in 1910 they didn't have to worry

I recently worked up some HO concrete railings (appropriate for steam era layouts) and described them on my blog: www.bobsworkbench.com Photos of the models are included there. Bob Sterner St.

Does anyone on the list have current contact information for Keith Sirman (The Sirman Collection) photo dealer? Mr Sirman was scheduled to be at the Amherst/Springfield Mass. Train show this past