Too bad the originals on the Library of Congress site are unavailable due to the shutdown. Thanks! -- Brian Ehni From: <jcdworkingonthenp@...> Reply-To: STMFC List

Having a little trouble posting however hope this works. Here is a link to trains: http://chicagopast.com/tagged/Trains There are several pages of photos here and note that the third photo down

---In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote: As a random factoid: William Fowler calls his cars "cars of the Fowler type" in at least one of these patents. It's likely a marketing tool, but since these cars

And if so, what is the shipping cost? Brian Leppert Carson City, NV

Hi guys, As a frame of reference as to what constitutes an "actual" Fowler boxcar, I just pulled the patents. Can't really have an intelligent discussion about the topic without 'em!

Yeah, Clark, but the problem here is the nomenclature has never been defined. If one says a 1937 AAR boxcar, or a USRA double sheathed boxcar, the mind's eye goes directly back to the drawing

Thanks for posting that great photo Paul Doggett UK ---In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote: The Chicago Past Website, archival photos of Chicago that one can get lost in for hours has a photo that

Jim, that is a GATC-built 6K gal. capacity six compartment bulk wine car. Unfortunately, the reporting marks aren't visible. but it's likely to be a GATX car. There's no way to know whether it was

Being a relative lightweight in this conversation I think some are missingthe forest and just looking at trees. To me, the purpose of these modeler coinednames is so a person can get a vision in their

Rob, Given your extensive study of these cars, I have a question for you in regards to the GT's 6' version of these cars. In S scale there has been produced a 6' version in resin. These are great cars

The Chicago Past Website, archival photos of Chicago that one can get lost in for hours has a photo that I have found rather captivating with the different cars, the switch lead layouts. This one:

BTW,Does anyone know if Sunshine's decals are stillavailable,especially the "chalk marks" ? Armand Premo

I think there is a problem with the debate about whether to call the carsDominion or Fowler. I guess because of Westerfield’s extensive line of kits and Swain &Clegg’s articles in Mainline

---In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote: I generally refer to Canadian cars as "Dominion", and to American cars as "Fowlers". There are subtle but obvious design differences between the two nation's

I generally refer to Canadian cars as "Dominion", and to American cars as "Fowlers". There are subtle but obvious design differences between the two nation's "Fowler-type" cars, even after the

If the prototype literature does not have a specific name for them, but there is a need for a name to be used by modelers, there probably are a few possibilities. Among others, how about "Fowler-type

However Dominion Car and Foundry built more than one style of boxcar. Pierre Oliver ---In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote: Pierre Oliver wrote: "I further believe that the most correct title for these

Pierre Oliver wrote: "I further believe that the most correct title for these cars is simply '36' single sheathed cars'."   It's not like there are any other 36 ft SS boxcars out there.   Ben Hom

Finally having had a few minutes to peruse some articles I have an idea why the term Dominion car is used. It would appear that a significant number of the cars in question were built by Dominion Car

And where does this leave those of us whose railroad had “Fowler clones”? Did the clones use the Fowler patent? Should they be called Fowler Clones? Doug Harding www.iowacentralrr.org