Date   

Re: new lumber load kit from Owl Mountain

William Keene <wakeene@...>
 

Hello Group,

This has been an interesting thread. Especially since I am right now developing what the flat car fleet should be for my layout. Thanks to all for the education.

I believe Doug might have hit on the reason that in the late 1950s lumber loads began to be split into two banded bundles athwart the deck of a flat car. My thought is that this was most likely done to ease loading and unloading with fork lift trucks. 

Cheers & Happy Modeling,
Bill Keene
Irvine, CA


On Aug 21, 2014, at 12:38 PM, 'Douglas Harding' doug.harding@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:


Would another factor regarding lumber loads be the species? Different species have different weights per board ft. And this will vary greatly depending if we are talking green (ie wet) lumber or dry lumber. Kiln dry being perhaps the lightest. Treated or creosoted lumber could be the heaviest. Different weight may impact the size of the load, not so much determined by the flat car but rather by the equipment used to load or unload. I can recall helping a lumberyard, unload the trucks. They had a small forklift and for some of the larger dimensional lumber bundles we had to have a guy or two stand on the back bumper of the fork lift truck to help balance the load. If the supplier shipped too large of a bundle it could not be unloaded at the local yard.

 

Here is a chart showing the different weights by species: http://www.osbornelumber.net/weights--measures.html from a west coast lumber provider.

And here is a calculator for figuring the weight of different species. http://www.csgnetwork.com/lumberweight.html grant this calculator has mostly hardwoods listed, but you can quickly get an idea of how the weight varies between species.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 




Re: new lumber load kit from Owl Mountain

Douglas Harding
 

Would another factor regarding lumber loads be the species? Different species have different weights per board ft. And this will vary greatly depending if we are talking green (ie wet) lumber or dry lumber. Kiln dry being perhaps the lightest. Treated or creosoted lumber could be the heaviest. Different weight may impact the size of the load, not so much determined by the flat car but rather by the equipment used to load or unload. I can recall helping a lumberyard, unload the trucks. They had a small forklift and for some of the larger dimensional lumber bundles we had to have a guy or two stand on the back bumper of the fork lift truck to help balance the load. If the supplier shipped too large of a bundle it could not be unloaded at the local yard.

 

Here is a chart showing the different weights by species: http://www.osbornelumber.net/weights--measures.html from a west coast lumber provider.

And here is a calculator for figuring the weight of different species. http://www.csgnetwork.com/lumberweight.html grant this calculator has mostly hardwoods listed, but you can quickly get an idea of how the weight varies between species.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 


Re: new lumber load kit from Owl Mountain

Tony Thompson
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

> Pg 151, There are some longer and medium stacks on the long train of lumber.

Yep, I've seen such photos. Some cars are maximally loaded, some appear to be more lightly loaded. Most 50 to 53 foot flat cars in 1948 were 50 ton cars (like the Proto 2000 AAR flat car) -- no doubt SP started buying large numbers of 70 ton flat cars for a good reason.


      In the case of SP, as it happens, all 53-foot cars were 70-ton cars with fishbelly side sills, and SP lumber shipping was VERY heavily on SP cars. So in a photo like page 151, all the fishbelly side sill cars are 70-ton cars.

Also, was there a change at some point in AAR rules? I ask because many lumber loads I have seen in photos are split in the middle, centerbeam-ish style, rather than the stack of boards being continuous across the width of the deck. This style was common in the 1960's. And instead of the tall stakes, there were steel bands over the stacks, anchored in the stake pockets. I am interested in late 50's to mid 60's regarding these flat car lumber loading practices.


       Good point. The AAR loading rules permitted steel banding as early as 1940, but you don't see it in photos of loads until the late 1950s, when it was often combined with side stakes. Around 1960, loading with banding only began to be seen, as you say, anchored in the stake pockets, along with bands for individual stacks in the load.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: new lumber load kit from Owl Mountain

Tim O'Connor
 

Tony, fair enough --

> Pg 204, freight with two 53ft flats with medium stacks of lumber.

What makes those (distant) flats 53 feet or 70 ton? They could be shorter
or 50 ton cars or both.

> Pg 225, thinner boards, shifted load, but about the same 16-18 ft boards on 50-ft car.

Definitely a 50 ton car -- your caption even says so!

> Pg 249, excellent photo of a string of cars

Yes, ok, that's ONE picture. :-)

> Pg 151, There are some longer and medium stacks on the long train of lumber.

Yep, I've seen such photos. Some cars are maximally loaded, some appear to
be more lightly loaded. Most 50 to 53 foot flat cars in 1948 were 50 ton cars
(like the Proto 2000 AAR flat car) -- no doubt SP started buying large numbers
of 70 ton flat cars for a good reason.

I didn't say the Owl Mountain kit was bad (and I said I plan to use it) but it
just doesn't have that "heavily loaded" look.

Also, was there a change at some point in AAR rules? I ask because many lumber
loads I have seen in photos are split in the middle, centerbeam-ish style, rather
than the stack of boards being continuous across the width of the deck. This
style was common in the 1960's. And instead of the tall stakes, there were steel
bands over the stacks, anchored in the stake pockets. I am interested in late 50's
to mid 60's regarding these flat car lumber loading practices.

Tim O'Connor


Re: CAD library

Scott H. Haycock
 

Most of these seem to be drawings for virtual railroad programs.

Scott Haycock


 

Hmmmm... Had some time at lunch, so I did a bit more reading on SketchUp, and I see that Trimble, the company that now owns the software, has it's own web site of 3-D shareware models, 3 D Warehouse:.
3D Warehouse
.
Do a search on "railroad", and you'll immediately see one of the problems with the concept of a shareware library... some of the files are really good, some are simply silly, and no way to easily tell them apart.
.
Buyer beware.


Dennis Storzek


 




Re: CAD library

destorzek@...
 

Hmmmm... Had some time at lunch, so I did a bit more reading on SketchUp, and I see that Trimble, the company that now owns the software, has it's own web site of 3-D shareware models, 3 D Warehouse:.
3D Warehouse
.
Do a search on "railroad", and you'll immediately see one of the problems with the concept of a shareware library... some of the files are really good, some are simply silly, and no way to easily tell them apart.
.
Buyer beware.

Dennis Storzek

 


Re: HOPPER CAR BRAKE RIGGING

WILLIAM PARDIE
 

Help:


I seem to have every Train Shed publication but this one.  If anyone has
#62 and can scan and send a copy of the C&O hopper it would be immensely
appreciated.

Bill

On Aug 21, 2014, at 2:50 AM, jaydeet2001@... [STMFC] wrote:

 

The second series shown in the 1925 CBC (also Train Shed 62) looks like a typical KD installation. The drawing for the C&O hopper on the next page includes brake rodding.David Thompson



Re: HOPPER CAR BRAKE RIGGING

David
 

The second series shown in the 1925 CBC (also Train Shed 62) looks like a typical KD installation. The drawing for the C&O hopper on the next page includes brake rodding.David Thompson


Re: CAD library

destorzek@...
 

---In STMFC@..., <Jeff.A.Aley@...> wrote :


"A full-custom design will always have the opportunity to be “better” than one that uses standard components.  In this context, “better” means that the resulting model will be more finely detailed."

 

"However, a model assembled from a library of components can be designed much more quickly, with far less skill.  So it is my opinion that a CAD library is a good idea if one wishes to crank out “layout quality” designs, but full-custom design is necessary for “contest quality”.

 

Eh? How is this different than what we have today? If the modeler does the research to confirm that the available CAD file actually represents the part he needs, then that CAD file may well be the best representation there is. Modeling it again from scratch (solid modeling in CAD) may only get him to the exact same place, except via the long way around the barn. Then again, if the modeler only just assumes that the CAD file makes the part he needs, that is no different than assuming that the handbrake he can buy from PSC is the one he needs, without confirming it actually is.
.
Which brings up some thoughts about how people are envisioning how this would work. Some people seem to view this as a catalog of parts... I'll order one of these, two of those, and glue them all to my model when they come. That will work, but is not the best use of this technology, should it ever develop to the point where it is useful at all. All processes have a minimum practical thickness for the parts they can produce, current day injection molding included. This is one reason the neat wood boxcar door hardware that Grandt Line makes as separate parts in O scale are only available combined into a small size narrow gauge door in HO; as separate parts they are just too darned small, with no thick section to gate into. This same problem is going to persist with custom RP parts.
.
The better way is for the modeler to combine the separate CAD files into one larger part. Say he wants to create a reefer side. He models the basic side to the dimensions he needs, modeling the board grooves or rivet seams as appropriate, then finds a pre-modeled grab iron bracket in the library and adds as many as needed, a Preco fan, six hinges placed as needed, the Miner latch handle and the top and bottom latches, modeling the bar that connects them to whatever length he needs. Now part thickness is no longer a problem, because any extra thickness that was included to make stand-alone parts possible can be "buried" into the thickness of the side. This suggests one "standard" that would be nice; the zero datum of the part should be at the location where it would properly meet the surface it is attached to, any addition thickness would be negative values below that datum.
.
What form would this "library" take? Well one possibility is already being used by Shapeways. They hold the files to be printed as the creator directs. If the file is "private", they will only print it for the owner. If arrangements have been made to sell parts to the public, then they will print for anyone, and collect a royalty for the creator. NOBODY actually gets the raw file from Shapeways. This gives the creator maximum protection, but makes the "library" the least useful to others, as they cannot access the files to modify or expand upon. A good example of this is the 6000 gal. UTLX tank car underframe that was designed for the old MDC kit; a really simple stretch would adapt it to the Blackstone Models (PSC) 6500 gal tank, a much better model of the tank, but apparently the creator has no interest in doing any more work on this project, so it is simply unavailable.
.
At the present time the Rapid Prototyping/3-D printing industry has pretty much standardized on the STL file format, so one possibility is for the "library" to be a collection of files in this format. I'm not terribly familiar with this format, other than knowing that it's a surface mesh that is scalable, but not terribly useful for manufacturing. Most CAM software won't run toolpaths on a STL file; indeed, they treat it like a point cloud, and while a new model can be built from the data, it's about as much work as just starting over. I have read, however, that STL files can be combined, and the unneeded buried surfaces removed with mesh editing software, so a library of STL shareware would be reasonably safe from being exploited for the development of injection molds, which could be an issue for some people.
.
Most useful to the modeler would be to have a library of shareware solid models in one of the common CAD interchange formats; DXF, IGES, or STEP. Most CAD software will import at least one of these formats, and the solid models become available for unlimited modification, with a new STL file exported only for printing. This could allow good parts to get better; multiple variations could become available because only the work to do the modification need be invested, rather than modeling the entire part all over again. On the other hand, good parts may become corrupted, as people make changes without checking their data, and of course, everyone who contributes would feel that the commercial guys were using their work without compensation, whether that was true or not.
.
This could get interesting.
.
Dennis Storzek




Re: LCL Load ca. 1900

Jack Mullen
 

ICC Safety Appliance Standards of 1911 provide "Uncoupling levers may be either single or double, and of any efficient design. ... When single lever is used it shall be placed on left side of end of car" Left, of course, when facing the end from outside. Jack "why use two when one will do" Mullen


Models in the photos Section

Brian Carlson
 

I added an album in the photos section of my models. Just 5 models I had handy when i went to the model RR club. (My good stuff stays at home normally). I plan to take a few more boxes up the next time, probably 24 cars or so.

There is nothing real special about any of them, Proto 2000, Type 21 Mobilgas, The sunshine Grace tank car gift from Naperville, an IM 1957 CF cov hopper, Rapido reefer, and IM Alt std hopper. I model 1957 so the cars are reweighed as appropriate, these models all had light weathering except the Grace car. Any comments and correction on details would be appreciated. Ignore the out of era cars in the background.

 

Brian J. Carlson, P.E. NKPHTS 2972L

Special Projects Director

 


Re: new lumber load kit from Owl Mountain

Tony Thompson
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

Chuck, if you've ever seen a single photo of a 70 ton flat car with a load that looks like that, can you post a link to it? For my part, as I said, I will try to use the product to model what I have seen in photos of 70 ton cars.


     Tim, in fact there are a number of transition-era photos which are the basis for the Owl Mountain 3001 kit. They are in my Volume 3 on _SP Freight Cars_ covering flat cars and automobile cars.
      Here is a list:

Pg 204, freight with two 53ft flats with medium stacks of lumber.
Pg 225, thinner boards, shifted load, but about the same 16-18 ft boards on 50-ft car.
Pg 249, excellent photo of a string of cars, all load that fill about 70% the length of the decks, also mixed heights and not even standardized on where on the flatcar deck the stacks will be made.  The first car has them to the ends, then the next car has them centered.
Pg 262 Somewhat shorter stacks fully loading a 50-ton 40ft car.

Pg 151, There are some longer and medium stacks on the long train of lumber.  Most of these don't go completely to the ends of the car.  Most of the other photos in the book showing full length loads are of later (1960's) clean cut boards (not what the 3001 kit is meant to be).
        Anyone not sure what this is about, see my review of the Owl Mountain kit at: 

http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2014/08/open-car-loads-lumber-from-owl-mountain.html

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: CAD library

Aley, Jeff A
 

As usual, Tom (and others) have very wise things to say.  In my opinion (and experience) there is a time and place for standardization (i.e. a CAD library) and a time and place for customization.

 

A full-custom design will always have the opportunity to be “better” than one that uses standard components.  In this context, “better” means that the resulting model will be more finely detailed.

 

However, a model assembled from a library of components can be designed much more quickly, with far less skill.  So it is my opinion that a CAD library is a good idea if one wishes to crank out “layout quality” designs, but full-custom design is necessary for “contest quality”.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff Aley

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 7:12 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: CAD library

 

 

Some notes from the real world…

  

A good designer has to be familiar with the capabilities of the manufacturing process he’s designing for. By their nature, stereolithography underbuilds features slightly, and MJM machines overbuild by a similar amount. Not a factor unless you’re designing things like ¾” dia rivet heads in HO. For SLA designs I increase the head diameter by 1/8”; for MJM designs I decrease it by the same amount. It may seem like no big deal, 1/8” in HO is just under 0.0015”. But if I use the same design file to print an uncompensated ¾” rivet head in each process,  the difference in the printed rivets (5/8” SLA vs. 7/8” MJM) is 40% and is very noticeable. Prototype rivet heads are not full hemispheres, but to get all the rivets to print properly and be visible through a couple of coats of paint, I make them full hemispheric domes and put each on a 1/8” riser. If a car uses several different sizes of rivets, and you want to represent the visual differences, it may be necessary to design the smallest ones so they print reliably, even if that makes them larger that they should be, and increase the other sizes accordingly. In HO I know if I want to represent a series of surfaces that are offset from one another, like a window frame, or a rivet batten on a car side, the layers must be separated by at least 3/8” for the layering to be noticeable. In other words, it helps if you can apply the precision touch of an engineering designer with the eye of an artist.

 


Re: PRR 1954 & 1958 Freight Rosters

John Sykes III
 

An update on the DL&W roster.

I sent a copy of the edited roster file to Mike Del Vecchio, who made some additional suggestions.  As soon as these are all incorporated, I will post it here and on the DL&W-Modeling site.  We are going to probably add some HO modeling info to the database (Mike says that there is, unfortunately, not very much of it to add).


-- John


Re: PRR 1954 & 1958 Freight Rosters

Chuck Higdon
 

Thanks John,

Looks great,

Take care,

Chuck



From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 5:13 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] PRR 1954 & 1958 Freight Rosters





Hey guize!

Just uploaded a roster of PRR freight equipment from the 1954 & 1958 ORER in
Excel spreadsheet format. Now if you want to know how many hoppers were
lost of gained in that timeframe, it's a piece of cake. I did not include
as much info in this roster as the DL&W* and Erie rosters I previously
posted since there is already a lot of info on line, particularly the
diagrams on Rob Schoenberg's great website and Jerry Britton's Keystone
crossings. Also, production of many PRR classes covered up to a decade or
more, so it is sometimes difficult to tell exactly when a specific car was
built. Have fun and if you see any major issues, let me know. I will try
to correct them as warranted.



-- John



* Corrected/improved version of DL&W roster should be up in a day or two at
the max.


Re: MILW combo door car

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Clark

There is a photo of a 29500-series car in the May 1987 MODEL RAILROADING on page 41. The ends are indeed late improved Dreadnaught (banana taper). This particular group of cars was welded and apparently had SRE overhanging diagonal panel roofs.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff


On 8/20/14 10:28 AM, cepropst@q.com [STMFC] wrote:

 

A friend bought a Milwaukee combination door mini-kit from Chad Boas at the St Louis meet. He only has side views of the car. He called to ask if I knew what ends he should use on this Branchline body? There’s a photo in the Milw FC color guide showing a bit of the end. It looks like a R-3-4 ‘banana tape’ end to me. Thought I’d check with this group before he proceeds with my choice. Cars are in the 29xxx series.
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Re: Well you know it's time to stop modeling for the night when...

Andy Harman
 

At 08:31 AM 8/18/2014 -0400, you wrote:
It happened on an L&N autorack car. Â A side panel with the logo was
removed and was reinstalled upside down. Â Photos exist.
This is a car I must model someday:
http://www.gp30.com/osborn/eastbound.jpg

Never found decals for this scheme though.

Andy


Re: Well you know it's time to stop modeling for the night when...

Andy Harman
 

At 12:53 AM 8/18/2014 -0400, you wrote:
Honestly with F&C I'm to the point where I usually skip the words and look
at the pics. I'd be happy with more and better reproduced photos and
fewer words. How helpful is "Assemble the carbody" anyway. Don't get me
wrong. I have dozens of his kits, to build and have more to bu, so they
fill a need. sometimes it's a need I didn't know I had, LOL.
Gene Fusco set the standard for instructions. No, I don't expect every
manufacturer to do as well - but he proved it can be done. Tangent is a
close second.

Andy


Re: Well you know it's time to stop modeling for the night when...

Andy Harman
 

At 11:55 PM 8/16/2014 -0400, you wrote:
That reminded me of the time a fast moving van with a camera man sticking
out the top was chasing 844 and train [ which I was on ]. The traffic came
to a stop and the van did a quick 360 degree slide
I was riding a Southern steam special in the early 80s, and there in the chase line was a full size van with the side door wide open. On the roof was a guy with a video camera sitting in a lounge chair, held to the luggage rack with bungee cords.

Andy


HOPPER CAR BRAKE RIGGING

WILLIAM PARDIE
 

In addition to completing new kits I have embarked on a mission
to update some of my older cars. One on my bench now is an early
NKP wood composite hopper car. I had completed the car with AB brakes,
however, I would like to return it to the original split K system. Does anyone
have a diagran showing the placement of the components and rodding?

Thanks in advance.

Bill Pardie