Date   

Re: Georgia RR decals

tomedill@frontier.com
 

Does anyone know of a source for white Georgia RR decals for the Tichy steel outside braced boxcar? As I understand it the silver paint scheme was not instituted until the late 1950's so not appropriate for era I model-1950-52. thanks, Tom Dill


Re: boxcar design evolution

rwitt_2000
 



Rob Kirkham wrote:

A while ago I was able to make a trip into Sandon BC and take photos
and
measurements of the freight cars there. Now I'm writing a
description of
two of the cars. They were from the CPR 230000-233499 series
composite
boxcars - boxcars very much like the USRA design. And as I write
about
them, I wanted to say that when the cars were built in 1920-21, they
were
more or less the best boxcar design on the market.

But I wonder if that is really accurate? For example, would the
similar
cars used on other railways that used Z bracing (rather than the
pressed
steel shapes on the USRA and CP cars) be considered better or poorer
- or
was the difference inconsequential from the point of view of boxcar
design
evolution? Meanwhile, was there anything else on the market yet
that was
clearly superior?
--- In STMFC@..., "soolinehistory" Dennis Storzek replied:

Where are you saying these fit in the evolutionary chain, Rob? The
first steel frame boxcars used stock mill shapes, either Z, C, or L
section, while some of the last single sheathed composite cars did
likewise. The cars with the pressed framing fit in the middle, a good
idea that came... and went.

The argument for purpose designed pressings is they make more
efficient use of material, although I don't think the car designs that
made use of them were appreciably lighter.

The argument against purpose designed pressings was that they were
difficult to repair; the railroad would have to make custom pressing
dies to make replacement parts, whereas mill shapes were available off
the shelf, so to speak. Late in the cars lives it was found that the
pressings trapped water and tended to rust out near the bottom, but I
don't think this happened fast enough to really have any impact on the
debate; the cars lasted through a reasonable service life without major
problems. Anyway, cars with Z section framing also could have problems
with cracking of the posts and braces due to repeated stress reversals
in the truss members.

It appears that the two design philosophies coexisted for years
without either proving to be truly superior.
==========================

Looking at the the entire North American boxcar fleet we have the
eastern railroads, PRR, NYC and B&O that adopted the all steel designs
and were not large users of single-sheathed designs. So one could ask
the question was the all-steel designs superior to the single-sheathed
designs. Obviously for the mid-western, western and Canadian railroads
the single-sheathed design apparently better met their requirements.

Bob Witt


Re: boxcar design evolution

Robert kirkham
 

That is part of what I was wondering about Dennis. I don't know where to slot these cars (or the USRA cars) as of 1920/21.

Regarding the steel used for framing the sides, CP had over 20000 fowler cars on the roster at that time - all with Z bracing. But the CNR was continuing to build similar cars with Z bracing after the CPR 230000 series cars were built. That could mean nothing in terms of design evolution - the CNR was building fowler cars into the early 1920s as well. So it is possible the purpose-built pressed steel framing shape was considered an advance.

At the same time I see your point about repairs being more difficult. I have seen the weld lines where these shapes have cracked and were repaired. My sense of it is the repairs were done after the cars were moved into company service, but I have no data on that subject.

So to sum up what you are saying, the pressed steel braces amount to a difference - not necessarily an advance.

Alternatively, the USRA design cars could be described as an advancement based on size - but I don't know that they were the largest cars around for 1920, or merely a step in that direction. I take it from what I have read that there were not a great many boxcars built to larger specs for some time, but am not sure where exactly to place the USRA design. perhaps just part of a trend, but at least a step forward?

And of course there is the composite construction versus all steel construction. CPR had one all steel car on the roster in 1919 - CP 249000. Must have been an experiment. So the USRA style composite cars are not an advance in comparison to those.

Are there any other considerations one should apply in making that assessment?

Rob Kirkham


--------------------------------------------------
From: "soolinehistory" <destorzek@...>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 7:30 AM
To: <STMFC@...>
Subject: [STMFC] Re: boxcar design evolution



--- In STMFC@..., "Rob Kirkham" <rdkirkham@...> wrote:

A while ago I was able to make a trip into Sandon BC and take photos and
measurements of the freight cars there. Now I'm writing a description of
two of the cars. They were from the CPR 230000-233499 series composite
boxcars - boxcars very much like the USRA design. And as I write about
them, I wanted to say that when the cars were built in 1920-21, they were
more or less the best boxcar design on the market.

But I wonder if that is really accurate? For example, would the similar
cars used on other railways that used Z bracing (rather than the pressed
steel shapes on the USRA and CP cars) be considered better or poorer - or
was the difference inconsequential from the point of view of boxcar design
evolution? Meanwhile, was there anything else on the market yet that was
clearly superior?

Rob Kirkham
Where are you saying these fit in the evolutionary chain, Rob? The first steel frame boxcars used stock mill shapes, either Z, C, or L section, while some of the last single sheathed composite cars did likewise. The cars with the pressed framing fit in the middle, a good idea that came... and went.

The argument for purpose designed pressings is they make more efficient use of material, although I don't think the car designs that made use of them were appreciably lighter.

The argument against purpose designed pressings was that they were difficult to repair; the railroad would have to make custom pressing dies to make replacement parts, whereas mill shapes were available off the shelf, so to speak. Late in the cars lives it was found that the pressings trapped water and tended to rust out near the bottom, but I don't think this happened fast enough to really have any impact on the debate; the cars lasted through a reasonable service life without major problems. Anyway, cars with Z section framing also could have problems with cracking of the posts and braces due to repeated stress reversals in the truss members.

It appears that the two design philosophies coexisted for years without either proving to be truly superior.

Dennis



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links




Re: boxcar design evolution

soolinehistory <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Rob Kirkham" <rdkirkham@...> wrote:

A while ago I was able to make a trip into Sandon BC and take photos and
measurements of the freight cars there. Now I'm writing a description of
two of the cars. They were from the CPR 230000-233499 series composite
boxcars - boxcars very much like the USRA design. And as I write about
them, I wanted to say that when the cars were built in 1920-21, they were
more or less the best boxcar design on the market.

But I wonder if that is really accurate? For example, would the similar
cars used on other railways that used Z bracing (rather than the pressed
steel shapes on the USRA and CP cars) be considered better or poorer - or
was the difference inconsequential from the point of view of boxcar design
evolution? Meanwhile, was there anything else on the market yet that was
clearly superior?

Rob Kirkham
Where are you saying these fit in the evolutionary chain, Rob? The first steel frame boxcars used stock mill shapes, either Z, C, or L section, while some of the last single sheathed composite cars did likewise. The cars with the pressed framing fit in the middle, a good idea that came... and went.

The argument for purpose designed pressings is they make more efficient use of material, although I don't think the car designs that made use of them were appreciably lighter.

The argument against purpose designed pressings was that they were difficult to repair; the railroad would have to make custom pressing dies to make replacement parts, whereas mill shapes were available off the shelf, so to speak. Late in the cars lives it was found that the pressings trapped water and tended to rust out near the bottom, but I don't think this happened fast enough to really have any impact on the debate; the cars lasted through a reasonable service life without major problems. Anyway, cars with Z section framing also could have problems with cracking of the posts and braces due to repeated stress reversals in the truss members.

It appears that the two design philosophies coexisted for years without either proving to be truly superior.

Dennis


LV decals

naptownprr
 

Guys,

Does anyone know of a good source for Lehigh Valley decals? I've got a Stewart fish-belly side hopper that I'd like to paint for Lehigh Valley. Thanks.

Jim Hunter


Re: Missouri Pacific Boxcar

jerryglow2
 

The distinctive fishbelly underbelly underfrmes were used for a caboose rebuilding program starting in the late 40's and into the 50's resulting in what became the de facto standard steel caboose of the next decade or two.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@..., "mopacfirst" <ron.merrick@...> wrote:

This is one of a large number of single-sheathed cars which were upgraded to all-steel by MoPac at the DeSoto (MO) shop in the early 1950s. The original ends remained. Some cars had the Murphy as shown here, while others had inverted Dreadnaught. Sides are ten-panel, and the same height as the original. Roof is diagonal panel. The original cars came from several different series built in the twenties.

These small-capacity cars were intended for services such as the grain rush on light-rail branch lines, or other non-high-cube applications. Some were designated for LCL service, and during the rebuild they got a special blue and gray paint scheme with yellow door. None were ever in express service.

By the mid-sixties, their small size made them obsolete so they were converted in large numbers to MOW service, mostly tool or storage cars. Many had a wooden step added below the door, or other modifications to make them easier to get into -- this one apparently did not. Some others were converted to bunk cars with the addition of windows and even an end door. Most were never repainted, but simply had the road number painted out and a new X series MOW number applied. A few got complete, plain, repaints with minimal stenciling.

In drier parts of the MoPac system, some survived with paint and stenciling in excellent condition until recent years. Most of them that were on active track are gone now, replaced by 50' cars with roller bearing trucks.

Ron Merrick


--- In STMFC@..., Ricky Gilmore <x_white.bear_x@> wrote:

The Missouri Pacific boxcar photos are up. They can be seen here.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/619899423/pic/list




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Missouri Pacific Boxcar

mopacfirst
 

This is one of a large number of single-sheathed cars which were upgraded to all-steel by MoPac at the DeSoto (MO) shop in the early 1950s. The original ends remained. Some cars had the Murphy as shown here, while others had inverted Dreadnaught. Sides are ten-panel, and the same height as the original. Roof is diagonal panel. The original cars came from several different series built in the twenties.

These small-capacity cars were intended for services such as the grain rush on light-rail branch lines, or other non-high-cube applications. Some were designated for LCL service, and during the rebuild they got a special blue and gray paint scheme with yellow door. None were ever in express service.

By the mid-sixties, their small size made them obsolete so they were converted in large numbers to MOW service, mostly tool or storage cars. Many had a wooden step added below the door, or other modifications to make them easier to get into -- this one apparently did not. Some others were converted to bunk cars with the addition of windows and even an end door. Most were never repainted, but simply had the road number painted out and a new X series MOW number applied. A few got complete, plain, repaints with minimal stenciling.

In drier parts of the MoPac system, some survived with paint and stenciling in excellent condition until recent years. Most of them that were on active track are gone now, replaced by 50' cars with roller bearing trucks.

Ron Merrick

--- In STMFC@..., Ricky Gilmore <x_white.bear_x@...> wrote:

The Missouri Pacific boxcar photos are up. They can be seen here.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/619899423/pic/list




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Missouri Pacific Boxcar

Ricky Gilmore <x_white.bear_x@...>
 

The Missouri Pacific boxcar photos are up. They can be seen here.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/photos/album/619899423/pic/list


Re: boxcar design evolution

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Rob Kirkham wrote:
But I wonder if that is really accurate? For example, would the similar cars used on other railways that used Z bracing (rather than the pressed steel shapes on the USRA and CP cars) be considered better or poorer - or was the difference inconsequential from the point of view of boxcar design evolution?
I don't know the answer to your question, Rob, but SP and several other railroads which had received USRA single-sheathed cars did not duplicate them in subsequent years but went back to Z bars. At the least, they were unimpressed with the hat-section bracing.

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, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


boxcar design evolution

Robert kirkham
 

A while ago I was able to make a trip into Sandon BC and take photos and measurements of the freight cars there. Now I'm writing a description of two of the cars. They were from the CPR 230000-233499 series composite boxcars - boxcars very much like the USRA design. And as I write about them, I wanted to say that when the cars were built in 1920-21, they were more or less the best boxcar design on the market.

But I wonder if that is really accurate? For example, would the similar cars used on other railways that used Z bracing (rather than the pressed steel shapes on the USRA and CP cars) be considered better or poorer - or was the difference inconsequential from the point of view of boxcar design evolution? Meanwhile, was there anything else on the market yet that was clearly superior?

Rob Kirkham


Re: RPM-East wrap up

Scott
 

Lots of cool models thanks for sharing. I really liked Jim Dalbergs's Lackawanna TOFC with the canvas roof. Might have to steal that idea!

Scott


Missouri Pacific Boxcar

Ricky <x_white.bear_x@...>
 

I uploaded a few photos of a single door Missouri Pacific boxcar I took a couple weeks ago.Their waiting for moderator approval. It was found on the siding of the Dardanelle and Russelville Railroad in Arkansas.I thought is was a good opportunity to get some detail shots to help fellow modelers. I was amazed the roof walk was still there and it had what looked to be the original trucks. I don't know any details about this car( history, data, etc.) If anyone does know anything I love to hear about it. Tell me what y'all think about the photos I'm trying to get better at it.

Rick Gilmore
Tuscaloosa AL.


Re: A.E. Staley tank car paint schemes

Tim O'Connor
 

Richard, thanks!

To add data points, the 1955 Illinois Central Annual Report has a
color photo of a whole string of white A.E. Staley tank cars in Decatur
Illinois, next to a gigantic grain elevator complex.

I have a 1956 photo of AESX 603 which is an 8k with a build date of 1928.
But the builder is Pressed Steel. It's very similar but not identical to a
Type 27. And it is orange. A photo of AESX 455 from the same era shows a
white paint scheme, but otherwise the car appears identical to 603.

Oh well. I'm guessing that the black cars and aluminum cars were
repainted by the 1950's, so I'll just have to live with the anachronism.

Tim O'Connor

---------------------------------------------

I have two Intermountain Type 27 tank car paint schemes - black car,
and a silver car. And I have a Proto2000 Type 21 paint scheme - orange.
I'm pretty sure there were orange cars, and WHITE cars in the 1950's.
But I've never seen a silver (aluminum) car, and the only black car
photos I've seen are from the 1930's...
So my questions: Is there a chronological order to Staley paint schemes?
Are the Intermountain cars foobies? Did multiple Staley paint schemes
co-exist in the 1950's?

I have photos of Type 27s with both black and aluminum tanks leased
by SHPX to Staley in the '30s and '40s, so the IM cars are definitely
authentic, though I don't know how long those leases lasted. They
must have been pretty long-term, though, otherwise SHPX wouldn't have
gone to the trouble to stencil the cars with the elaborate Staley
lettering. The orange Staley scheme was adopted early in the 1950s,
and I have a photo of an orange Type 21, so the Proto 2000 car is
accurate as well, for that time period.

Richard Hendrickson


RPM-East wrap up

Eric Hansmann
 

The RPM-East 2011 event wrapped up a couple of weekends ago. There are two Internet sites that feature images and video taken at the event. A number of the display room models were digitally captured and can be viewed at a gallery here:

http://www.pbase.com/ehansmann/rpmeast_2011_greensburg_penna

Tom Wilson shares video of an operating session at Larry Kline's Bowest O scale layout here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LawN_afJzQ

Mark your calendars for RPM-Valley Forge, to be held March 23-25, 2012 in Malvern, PA. Here's that website:

http://www.phillynmra.org/RPMMeet.html

The RPM-East 2013 will return to the Greensburg Four Points Sheraton on March 22-23, 2013.

Eric Hansmann
RPM-East publicity and web guy


Re: A.E. Staley tank car paint schemes

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Apr 5, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Tim O'Connor wrote:


I have two Intermountain Type 27 tank car paint schemes - black car,
and a silver car. And I have a Proto2000 Type 21 paint scheme -
orange.
I'm pretty sure there were orange cars, and WHITE cars in the 1950's.
But I've never seen a silver (aluminum) car, and the only black car
photos I've seen are from the 1930's...

So my questions: Is there a chronological order to Staley paint
schemes?
Are the Intermountain cars foobies? Did multiple Staley paint schemes
co-exist in the 1950's?
I have photos of Type 27s with both black and aluminum tanks leased
by SHPX to Staley in the '30s and '40s, so the IM cars are definitely
authentic, though I don't know how long those leases lasted. They
must have been pretty long-term, though, otherwise SHPX wouldn't have
gone to the trouble to stencil the cars with the elaborate Staley
lettering. The orange Staley scheme was adopted early in the 1950s,
and I have a photo of an orange Type 21, so the Proto 2000 car is
accurate as well, for that time period.

Richard Hendrickson


Gondola covers and coil cars (UNCLASSIFIED)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Hi all;

I thank you all for your responses on container cars, and now wonder if you
can provide any insights into what RRs were using the following covers:

What RRs used the Youngstown-produced rounded 3-piece covers?

What RRs (aside from NKP and B&O) used the "Republic" coil covers (and
skids)?

Has anyone (manufacturer) expressed any interest in doing any pre-1967 coil
cars or 3-piece cover cars?

Thanks!

Elden Gatwood


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


A.E. Staley tank car paint schemes

Tim O'Connor
 

I have two Intermountain Type 27 tank car paint schemes - black car,
and a silver car. And I have a Proto2000 Type 21 paint scheme - orange.
I'm pretty sure there were orange cars, and WHITE cars in the 1950's.
But I've never seen a silver (aluminum) car, and the only black car
photos I've seen are from the 1930's...

So my questions: Is there a chronological order to Staley paint schemes?
Are the Intermountain cars foobies? Did multiple Staley paint schemes
co-exist in the 1950's?

Thanks

Tim O'Connor


Re: SHPX 8K Tank Car Assistance

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Apr 4, 2011, at 3:03 PM, John Golden wrote:

Gentlemen,

I'm having a lot of fun rebuilding an Intermountain car this week
with all the
brass and metal parts, etc., but I looked close at my prototype
photo and found
that I goofed up. Turns out I missed an important detail on the
prototype photo
and it won't match the model I'm making.


Can anyone advise if SHPX had any 8,000-gal Type 27 cars with two
bands, no
heater pipes, no platform, and an AB brake arrangement with the
valve and the
reservoir on the same side with the AB valve on top of the
reservoir? I've
looked through Ted's tank car guide and Post-war fleet book, both
RP Cycs, and a
host of other books and can't find many SHPX cars to compare, and
none that
match. I haven't installed a ladder yet so I can with the three-
rung or the
full ladder. I hate to ask for help but I've exhausted my
resources in my
meager library.

Also, if I may, where the retainer valve?
I have lots of builder's photos of later Type 27s built for Shippers
Car Line that match the specs above. These cars were built in
1937-'41 and numbered in the 20xxx through 226xx series. I also have
an in-service photo that I took myself in the '60s of SHPX 20632.
The retainer valves were mounted at the outer end of the underframe
diagonal, inside the end running board and adjacent to the brake
wheel. I'm sending you a couple of scans off-list.

Richard Hendrickson


SHPX 8K Tank Car Assistance

golden1014
 

Gentlemen,

I'm having a lot of fun rebuilding an Intermountain car this week with all the
brass and metal parts, etc., but I looked close at my prototype photo and found
that I goofed up.  Turns out I missed an important detail on the prototype photo
and it won't match the model I'm making. 


Can anyone advise if SHPX had any 8,000-gal Type 27 cars with two bands, no
heater pipes, no platform, and an AB brake arrangement with the valve and the
reservoir on the same side with the AB valve on top of the reservoir?  I've
looked through Ted's tank car guide and Post-war fleet book, both RP Cycs, and a
host of other books and can't find many SHPX cars to compare, and none that
match.  I haven't installed a ladder yet so I can with the three-rung or the
full ladder.  I hate to ask for help but I've exhausted my resources in my
meager library.

Also, if I may, where the retainer valve?
 
John Golden
O'Fallon, IL
 
2011 St. Louis RPM Meet Info and Flyer:
http://icg.home.mindspring.com/rpm/stlrpm2011.pdf


Re: Walthers 30' wood caboose with offset cupola

spsalso
 

I ordered my various Walthers UP CA1's February 25th of 2005. And I received them not a whole lot later than that. Check out 932-7541, 2, 3 on the Walthers site.


Ed

Edward Sutorik

98101 - 98120 of 196820