Date   

US Navy 36 Foot Box Cars-Late 1940's

smadanek@...
 

After the horrendous disastrous Port Chicago explosion in the SF Bay Area in 1944, I understand the US Navy acquired some ex DRGW 36 foot box cars to replace those for use in moving munitions and other military supplies around the sprawling complex of docks and warehouses. I have an undecorated Accurail 1400 series boxcar which matches the DRGW box cars and am thinking it would be interesting to paint it off-white and letter it for the US Navy cars. 


The only USN decals I have been able to find are for silver helium cars and appear to be 1950's versions of the Navy lettering scheme. I don't have a good side view of these cars in their late 1940's USN guise. There are survivors of this set of cars and at least one of them is at the Western Railroad museum in Rio Vista, California but repainted as a DRGW car. 


I would welcome any pointer to a source for existing decals.  Pictures of the cars from the 1940's would also be welcome. There is a presentation on home made and printed simple decals at the next NMRA PCR Coast Division meeting on March 4, and I would like to gain from that with a ready sample.  Last resort is to visit the Western Railroad Museum (it's only about 25 miles away) and see if I can look access their vast photo archive for a picture.  Unfortunately last time I asked they wanted $40 a print.


Any assistance is greatly appreciated.


Ken Adams

Up Walnut Creek



Re: M&StL Brake System Arrangement Question/Help

Tim O'Connor
 

Bill

I've seen many modern freight cars with levers set at an angle relative to
the ground, but it's cool you found a much older car with the arrangement. I
have not noticed it on any other steam era cars.

Tim O'Connor


I am building a Sunshine kit of the M&StL's 24000 series kit, a Pratt trussed SS car w/XLA roof and composite ends built in 1930, originally w/KC brake. These particular cars had what I will call a "triangular bracket" (attached to the center sill I think) to which was apparently mounted the brake lever at about a 30 degree angle. I am basing this description on photos, I could have this all wrong. I don't necessarily want to get this arrangement 100% correct in terms of connections, rodding, etc. but would like it to look correct when viewed from the side. I am curious if anyone has any authoritative wisdom or resources I can use to reasonably recreate what I am seeing. If so you can email at fgexbill(at)tampabay.rr.com

I am certain this system was not unique to the M&StL.

Here is a link with six photos showing the triangular looking bracket and the seemingly angled lever forward of the brake cylinder: https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/XZTh4QnUhve5bcCPqwaB1xQlxPB8sv8aTbPT1Ax82qh

Thank you,
Bill Welch


Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

Tim O'Connor
 

The cars were built after 1960.

Just mildly wondered how long it wore that Mil. Rd paint scheme? Or were they repainted before leaving the shop? George Courtney


Re: Dartnaught ends source

Tim O'Connor
 


As I said, the Branchline ends must be kitbashed. The 4/4 ends from
Branchline are not the carbuilder (aka "Dartnaught") ends. Branchline's
version of the carbuilder end is an R+3/4 not a 4/4.

Fortunately it's an easy kitbash - just remove the top portion of the R+3/4
end and replace it with the top portion of a donor 4/4 end. So you need 4
ends in order to make two.

Tim O'Connor



Several years ago I bought several sets of the Branchline 1944 AAR 4-4 boxcar ends. I don't know if they are what you are looking for? I have searched all my sources for photos of the ends of the SAL cars and can't find anything. If you would contact me of line with a photo attached or I could contact you off line with a photo of the parts. And if these are the ones you need I would be glad to sell them at my original cost. Allan Smith

 
Branchline made dartnaught ends.

Richard Townsend


M&StL Brake System Arrangement Question/Help

Bill Welch
 

I am building a Sunshine kit of the M&StL's 24000 series kit, a Pratt trussed SS car w/XLA roof and composite ends built in 1930, originally w/KC brake. These particular cars had what I will call a "triangular bracket" (attached to the center sill I think) to which was apparently mounted the brake lever at about a 30 degree angle. I am basing this description on photos, I could have this all wrong. I don't necessarily want to get this arrangement 100% correct in terms of connections, rodding, etc. but would like it to look correct when viewed from the side. I am curious if anyone has any authoritative wisdom or resources I can use to reasonably recreate what I am seeing. If so you can email at fgexbill(at)tampabay.rr.com


I am certain this system was not unique to the M&StL.


Here is a link with six photos showing the triangular looking bracket and the seemingly angled lever forward of the brake cylinder: https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/XZTh4QnUhve5bcCPqwaB1xQlxPB8sv8aTbPT1Ax82qh

 

Thank you,

Bill Welch


Re: Armstrong Cork/Linoleum tank cars

Schleigh Mike
 

Hello Bruce, Dave, and the Group!

For what it is worth, all the Armstrong tankers are shown in the 1955 Tariff to possess 210 gallon domes.

Regards from Grove City in western Penna.

(PS--Dave Parker--I am still working on my assignment.)

On Thursday, February 15, 2018, 9:29:04 AM EST, 'Bruce F. Smith' smithbf@... [STMFC] wrote:


 

Dave,


Thanks for the info!  While I know that the Type 21 vs Type 27 was really a frame designation, the tanks were elongated (and therefore narrowed) to fit the Type 27 frame.  As a consequence, the ratio of dome diameter to tank diameter is a pretty good indicator, and the ratio for all 3 cars (ACKX 102, 107, 110) was almost identical to the P2K tank and quite a bit different from the IM tank.

I’m always a bit leery about getting dimensions from flattened 3/4 views because the of the perspective issues and the question of what you use for the standard measure (I like to use wheels). In order to get the same values for the rations, I measured the dome diameter, which is easily done at any angle, and the tank diameter right behind the dome, so that the same parallax issues applied to both.

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."




On Feb 14, 2018, at 6:01 PM, Dave Parker spottab@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

Bruce:

I am not an AC&F expert, and maybe someone like Ted can weigh in.  But, my understanding, largely from Kaminski's book (the tank car edition), is that the standardized Type 11, 21, 27, etc., only refers to the frame design, not the tank.  Second, if you scan the AC&F lot lists, you can see a number of references to transitional types (19, 20, 25, 26, etc.) that never became "official" AC&F car types.  Kaminski goes on to say that the full-on Type 27 wasn't really a thing until 1929.  But, Ted's SEFCRM book shows an April, 1926, builder's photo of RPX 2528 that looks, to my eye, as being more Type 27 than 21.  IOW, there were probably many tweener designs that may be difficult to pigeonhole as being one of the primary AC&F types.  

I would also caution against using dome diameter or volume as much of an identifier.  Texaco cars that were (I think) Type 21s and 10,000 gallons had 420-gal domes.  

The "standard" 10,000-gal Type 21 (the one represented by the P2000 model) had 210-gal domes (54" diameter), not 322.  This was pretty much the bare minimum for ARA Spec III cars (2% of the total volume, tank plus dome).
I  think this was one of those specs that was up to the buyer.  Texaco seems to have liked big domes generally; in the 1920s, they bought both PIW and PTCCo cars with 449-gal domes, which look phat on a 10 kgal car.  

Without seeing your photos, I don't know whether to suggest cannibalizing a P2000 Type 21, or an IM Type 27.  I think it would depend on which was closer dimensionally.  Have you flattened the perspective in any of your photos and obtained overall dimensions for both the frame and tank?

BTW, my 1936 tariff shows 12 ACKX cars, all about 10,000 gallons, and all with 210-gal domes.  I don't know if this helps with your conundrum.   


Re: Armstrong Cork/Linoleum tank cars

Bruce Smith
 

Dave,

Thanks for the info!  While I know that the Type 21 vs Type 27 was really a frame designation, the tanks were elongated (and therefore narrowed) to fit the Type 27 frame.  As a consequence, the ratio of dome diameter to tank diameter is a pretty good indicator, and the ratio for all 3 cars (ACKX 102, 107, 110) was almost identical to the P2K tank and quite a bit different from the IM tank.

I’m always a bit leery about getting dimensions from flattened 3/4 views because the of the perspective issues and the question of what you use for the standard measure (I like to use wheels). In order to get the same values for the rations, I measured the dome diameter, which is easily done at any angle, and the tank diameter right behind the dome, so that the same parallax issues applied to both.

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."




On Feb 14, 2018, at 6:01 PM, Dave Parker spottab@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

Bruce:

I am not an AC&F expert, and maybe someone like Ted can weigh in.  But, my understanding, largely from Kaminski's book (the tank car edition), is that the standardized Type 11, 21, 27, etc., only refers to the frame design, not the tank.  Second, if you scan the AC&F lot lists, you can see a number of references to transitional types (19, 20, 25, 26, etc.) that never became "official" AC&F car types.  Kaminski goes on to say that the full-on Type 27 wasn't really a thing until 1929.  But, Ted's SEFCRM book shows an April, 1926, builder's photo of RPX 2528 that looks, to my eye, as being more Type 27 than 21.  IOW, there were probably many tweener designs that may be difficult to pigeonhole as being one of the primary AC&F types.  

I would also caution against using dome diameter or volume as much of an identifier.  Texaco cars that were (I think) Type 21s and 10,000 gallons had 420-gal domes.  
<correction inserted>
The "standard" 10,000-gal Type 21 (the one represented by the P2000 model) had 210-gal domes (54" diameter), not 322.  This was pretty much the bare minimum for ARA Spec III cars (2% of the total volume, tank plus dome).
<end correction>
I  think this was one of those specs that was up to the buyer.  Texaco seems to have liked big domes generally; in the 1920s, they bought both PIW and PTCCo cars with 449-gal domes, which look phat on a 10 kgal car.  

Without seeing your photos, I don't know whether to suggest cannibalizing a P2000 Type 21, or an IM Type 27.  I think it would depend on which was closer dimensionally.  Have you flattened the perspective in any of your photos and obtained overall dimensions for both the frame and tank?

BTW, my 1936 tariff shows 12 ACKX cars, all about 10,000 gallons, and all with 210-gal domes.  I don't know if this helps with your conundrum.   


Re: Newly Rebuilt Western Pacific Boxcars

Garth Groff or Sally Sanford <sarahsan@...>
 

Bob,

Nice photo. Interesting switcher. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but WP series 19801-19850 are out of our period. They were rebuilt by Pullman in 1965 from 40' cars in WP series 20821-21400.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 2/14/18 11:31 PM, thecitrusbelt@... [STMFC] wrote:

 

WP boxcars leaving the Pullman-Standard (paint?) shop:

 

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=wp19811&o=wp

 

Note the P-S switcher.

 

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA



Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

George Courtney
 

Just mildly wondered how long it wore that Mil. Rd paint scheme?  Or were they repainted before leaving the shop?

George Courtney


Re: Dartnaught ends source

Allan Smith
 

Several years ago I bought several sets of the Branchline 1944 AAR 4-4 boxcar ends. I don't know if they are what you are looking for? I have searched all my sources for photos of the ends of the SAL cars and can't find anything. If you would contact me of line with a photo attached or I could contact you off line with a photo of the parts. And if these are the ones you need I would be glad to sell them at my original cost.


Smithal9@...


On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 7:50 PM, "Richard Townsend richtownsend@... [STMFC]" wrote:


 
Branchline made dartnaught ends.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: rwilson1056@... [STMFC]
To: STMFC Sent: Wed, Feb 14, 2018 7:06 pm
Subject: [STMFC] Dartnaught ends source

 
looking to kit-bash an SAL AF-5 and looking for a pair of ends
anybody know where they might be sourced?




Newly Rebuilt Western Pacific Boxcars

thecitrusbelt@...
 

WP boxcars leaving the Pullman-Standard (paint?) shop:

 

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=wp19811&o=wp

 

Note the P-S switcher.

 

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: Dartnaught ends source

Richard Townsend
 

Branchline made dartnaught ends.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR


-----Original Message-----
From: rwilson1056@... [STMFC]
To: STMFC
Sent: Wed, Feb 14, 2018 7:06 pm
Subject: [STMFC] Dartnaught ends source

 
looking to kit-bash an SAL AF-5 and looking for a pair of ends
anybody know where they might be sourced?


Re: Dartnaught ends source

Tim O'Connor
 

I think you'd have to bash the ends from the Branchline parts, unless
Stan had made them, and if Craig Zeni had some from Stan's stash. If
there were more 3rd party ends and roofs we could model a lot more postwar
box cars more easily, starting from the Branchline bodies.

Tim O'

looking to kit-bash an SAL AF-5 and looking for a pair of ends

anybody know where they might be sourced?


Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

Roger Huber <trainpainter@...>
 

Only if one wants to run it on their layout............and I would.............. if it were HO. If it's O scale I'd have to seriously lower the couplers and it would probably bump on the ties pretty bad.

Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works


On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, 8:40:08 PM CST, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:


 


does it matter?


Was the Lionel car HO or O scale?

Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works


On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, 6:39:11 PM CST, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:


 


The car never wore that number in service. 75000 was a 52 foot mill gondola
built in 1941 by the SSW, part of series 75000 to 75049.

Lionel offers a car painted this way. If you really want it, that's the way to go.

Tim O'Connor




Actually the car is SSW 75000 from the picture. I would love a set of decals for that car!
Roger Huber

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=ssw75000&o=ssw


Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

Tim O'Connor
 


does it matter?


Was the Lionel car HO or O scale?

Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works


On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, 6:39:11 PM CST, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:


 


The car never wore that number in service. 75000 was a 52 foot mill gondola
built in 1941 by the SSW, part of series 75000 to 75049.

Lionel offers a car painted this way. If you really want it, that's the way to go.

Tim O'Connor




Actually the car is SSW 75000 from the picture. I would love a set of decals for that car!
Roger Huber

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=ssw75000&o=ssw


Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

Todd Horton
 

There's no visible over spray on the black paint for the ends.  They went to a lot of work to make sure this didn't happen

From previous discussions on this, was this the exception or the example ?
 
Todd Horton



From: "thecitrusbelt@... [STMFC]"
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 7:51 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

 
And 25,000 cars later:
 
 
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA



Dartnaught ends source

rwilson1056
 

looking to kit-bash an SAL AF-5 and looking for a pair of ends

anybody know where they might be sourced?



Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

Roger Huber <trainpainter@...>
 

Was the Lionel car HO or O scale?

Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works


On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, 6:39:11 PM CST, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:


 


The car never wore that number in service. 75000 was a 52 foot mill gondola
built in 1941 by the SSW, part of series 75000 to 75049.

Lionel offers a car painted this way. If you really want it, that's the way to go.

Tim O'Connor




Actually the car is SSW 75000 from the picture. I would love a set of decals for that car!
Roger Huber

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=ssw75000&o=ssw


Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

thecitrusbelt@...
 

And 25,000 cars later:

 

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=milw2150&o=milw

 

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: SSW 75000 (PS-1 Boxcar)

Tim O'Connor
 


The car never wore that number in service. 75000 was a 52 foot mill gondola
built in 1941 by the SSW, part of series 75000 to 75049.

Lionel offers a car painted this way. If you really want it, that's the way to go.

Tim O'Connor




Actually the car is SSW 75000 from the picture. I would love a set of decals for that car!
Roger Huber

http://freight.railfan.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=ssw75000&o=ssw