Bill Pardie wrote: The RF&P cabooses were purchased in 1950, a good ten years before the California PUC added new requirements for caboose facilities, so these replacements cannot have had

The PE replacement cabooses came from the RP&F. Most were wood but at least one was steel. I would like to get a photo of the steel car if anyone knows of one (There is a pboto in one of the PE

Scott Pitzer wrote: The PUC did not force PE (or SP or anyone else) to replace any cabooses. But they did introduce new employee safety and comfort rules (including toilet facilities) that

No issues here opening those sheets from the site. John, these are really something and I for one appreciate them tremendously. It's a shame that you had the scare. I can relate. Rick Schoch

I like to believe that I do put value in the boxes. Collectively the hobby has been spoiled by low prices for sometime now. But that's a conversation for many beers There will be

Or, as a friend always says. “Shows you what our money’s worth” I’m notbitching about the prices, just saying I noticed it. I remember all the cryingwhen Kadee introduced a $30 RTR car...

Randy Hees wrote: [Passenger cars] were rarely interchanged, and when interchanged it was under private agreements not under general interchange rules."   Definitely not true for mail and express

Al Kresse wrote: "However no link shows up thru YAHOO GROUPS . . . unfortunately."   OK, try this: 1.  Log in to Yahoo. 2.  Go to the group website at

True, but the "car" was something like George Washington's axe by then. Early steel hoppers would typically be torn down to the trucks and rebuilt-in-kind, reusing whatever parts were still in good

I hope Guy Wilbur can chime in here with an actual citation, but until the FRA brought it's full regulatory weight to bear in the mid to late seventies, there used to be a clause in the ICC regs that

Ben, Thanks. However no link shows up thru YAHOO GROUPS . . . unfortunately. Al Kresse water.kresse@...

I guess I have stopped buying models at just the right point in time. I have enough car kits to keep me busy for the rest of my modeling career, too many really. Jared Harper Athens, GA ---In

In the case of trackage rights or detoured trains, there was no interchange involved because there was no waybill that passed from one company to another. The questionable equipment was still in the

Trackage rights isn't interchange. In interchange, the accepting road becomes responsible for the repair and maintenance of the car, so would have to worry about parts availability, or increased costs

There are multiple layers of rules (the following from memory, so correctionswelcome) by multiple organizations and government agencies… so it can be confusing. There were/are interchange rules,

Mike, A train on an emergency detour or trackage rights would technically not be interchanged and would therefore nor be subject to the interchange rules. It would be possible to embargo equipment to

This from Dennis Storzek...... " I recall the DSS&A ran ore cars with archbar trucks into the fifties and possibly sixties, never leaving home rails, and the Soo Line was still running wood cabooses

While most joint bars have holes alternating between round and oval some of the earlier had all oval holes allowing the nuts to all be on one side. One reason I have heard for the alternating pattern

It's called inflation Clark. :-) But you should concede that the quality of resin kits is improving, no? Pierre Oliverwww.elgincarshops.comwww.yarmouthmodelworks.com On

One can roughly divide the regulations pertaining to equipment into two categories; items that directly affected public or employee safety, and those that simply reduced repair time, parts inventory,