I've a picture, somewhere, of a Glen Jean & whatever high-sided gondola filled with coal making it way into upper Minnesota. Hard to tell the season. Al Kresse

Chuck Yungkurth wrote That jives perfectly with photos I've seen too Chuck. I think there were a few special orders in place for certain eastern roads' coal cars, but I've never heard of an order

I'll pile on with a question for you, Chuck: You mention that in the 70s the hopper supply was a variegated mix of on- and off-road hoppers. How far back does that phenomenon extend? What

Chuck, glad to see that you're still following this list. Were trains of off road hoppers seasonal? You've said that the Lackawanna stored their own hoppers during the summer. At the beginning of the

The B&LE hoppers with clasp brake truacks showed up regularly loaded with coal on the EL well into the 1970's. The coal came from mines in Northwestern Pennsylvania and was bound for the New York

Years ago some of these cars came through Ohio on the B&O! We lived in a valley and you could hear them coming! Those trucks made a lot of noise. Sincerely, Mark

The big power on the DM&IR was needed to pull the empties up hill to the mines. Loads needed brakes going back down the hill. Doug Brown

Robert D. Heninger wrote: . . . the shipping (no pun intended) season for ore ran from approximately April to Oct/Nov during much of the steam era. Let's see, it moved in ships when the lakes

The first part of the post about the change to tripple hopper was not by me, but by the person who wrote the original post. It is true that long ago there was coal that moved from the east to

Group, Just to add a couple of comments on ore cars as used on the GN: Not only did the ore cars spend half their active life running empty, they spent half the year sitting idle, as the shipping

mines That part is correct, but his first paragraph isn't, the switch to Taconite didn't lead to a switch from triples to shorter cars, and taconite is actually less dense than the natural ores, which

Point well taken. What I should have said is that, to an outside observer, AC&F's practice doesn't always appear consistent and is occasionally puzzling. Richard Hendrickson

CYRIL DURRENBERGER wrote: Everything Cyril says is correct, but for those not already familiar with this topic, it should be emphasized that ALL iron ore is "natural," but as the grade (iron

tI wondered if they somehow found a way (post-WWII) to process the ore at the mine in such a way that made it purer and denser. That would be the one explanation I can think of for a switch

Richard Hendrickson wrote: As Mr. Kaminski has explained, the AC&F types were a kind of default standard at any particular time, but buyers could and did purchase the underframe they wanted;

Dean Payne wrote: "I've been thinking about putting a B&LE car on my layout, and remember reading that the old Ulrich triple hopper kit was based on the B&LE prototype. However, the new Accurail kit

<sigh> It appears I have the "wrong" Kaminski book... (AC&F Centennial History... instead of Tank Cars from AC&F ...) This there another source of information to help distinguish between: Type 7 Type

<snip> On Apr 4, 2008, at 11:43 AM, Richard Hendrickson wrote: > <snip> Richard, Thanks! I agree about the need to slightly shorten the Tichy underframe - I compared the two at lunch and the tank

I've been thinking about putting a B&LE car on my layout, and remember reading that the old Ulrich triple hopper kit was based on the B&LE prototype. However, the new Accurail kit is nicer, from what

Bruce, there's no question that AC&F built some cars ca. 1919 that seem to have combined the Type 17 underframe with the later tank design, which had a larger dome and safeties on top of the dome