--- In STMFC@..., Jon Miller <atsf@...> wrote:

Then as now I assume there were many laws that "had no teeth".
This meaning that they are on paper but have no criminal penalties or
way to extract money associated with them.

These weren't "laws". The were the provisions of a voluntary agreement between the railroads.

Dennis

Rich
 
My notes have PH-29 as a sheep & hog train west.
PH in this case for Pan Handle-29 I have nothing
further,or, a reference to where the note orginated.
Wish I coould be more help on this one.
 
Fred Freitas


From: "SUVCWORR@..." <SUVCWORR@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Foreign Road Stock Cars (was Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC)


 

Greg,

According to 1952 freight car schedules, PRR was running the following east bound livestock trains:

SW-8 rest and water at Columbus no stop Herr's Island

PH-10 lives stock block terminated Herr's Island

VL-6 live stock block terminated Herr's Island

NW-86 rest water feed Columbus no work Herr's Island

NW-88 rest water feed Columbus no work Herr's Island

WS-8 block 2 live stock terminate Herr's Island block 3 continue to Enola without rest etc

FW-8 drop block at Herr;s Island pick-up rested live stock from VL-6, PH-10, WS-8, PH-29 and previous day FW-8.

Looks like the only live stock train beyond Herr's Island that worked Herr's Island was FW-8

So if wheel reports or consists of FW-8 can be located your question should be answered.

SW-8, NW-86, NW-88 would need to show consists from Columbus.

I don't know what PH-29 is. It is not in the freight schedule and should be an west bound or south bound train.

Rich Orr

-----Original Message-----
From: tgregmrtn@...
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Fri, Mar 18, 2011 8:38 pm
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Foreign Road Stock Cars (was Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC)

Dave wrote:
"Greg,
I do not want to re-open the entire fleet balance debate, but I have not yet
esearched what a viable mix of stock cars would be on a PRR stock train (e.g.
an-of-war) in central Pennsylvania (after resting the east bound animals at
err Island in Pittsburgh).
I guess the generic question is, once a stock car is loaded with stock that is
estined for a specific location, could that car be replaced when the stock was
emoved for rest/feeding/car cleaning at an intermediate location, or would the
ar and its stock go all the way to the destination?
I would think this would govern whether western road stock cars make it east of
err Island. I need to start identifying what models to buy.
Are there any era dependencies? I am modeling WWII.
Thanks,
ave Evans"

did a little research on the rail miles (current no era specific) and it shows
hat CHGO to Newark, NJ (not exactly the slaughter houses) show to be 898 miles
Greenville Docks, NJ is the same). If I do the math using 21 miles per hour as
he rule (stock would/should move faster than manifest freight) then it would
ake approximately 43 hours to make the move and would be outside the AAR rules
nd thus the stock would have to be rested and feed at Herr Island, PA
Pittsburgh, PA). But AAR records show during the WW2 era that train speeds were
igher than in most other eras. I believe when it comes to Herr Island you have
o think in terms of first in first out...

ut in my era of the mid 50s photo evidence shows that (dare I say this) most
ars returning west (great shots crossing the Rockville Bridge) were of western
rigin, not all just most. One need only search the pages of the Don Ball books
s well as the Don Wood's book to see that there was less than one would expect
f home road cars. I have found good evidence that the UP cars held down a
remendous amount of the business (related to car supply) and an abnormally low
mount of PRR cars show up. I was inspired to do my Shake N Take UP S-40-10 car
n DLS paint based on a photo in Don Wood's book taken on the Middle Div.
railing an L&N Mathers stock car, trailing a PRR Mountain headed west. Then in
he late fifties as the PRR began to take the stock business more seriously and
ith the rebuilding program to the K9 and K11 program the worm turns so to say.
e (SPF's) all realize that this business supported the fledgling Truc/Trailer
rain program. In my stock car fleet it i
s doubtful that I will even bother to represent a PRR car in my empty/loaded
ar fleet.
I have never done more than photo research and would love to see the accounting
ecords during the transition era to see exactly where the PRR K class cars
erived there per diem as they just don't really show up in on line photos other
han parked... go figure.and the then compare the off line cars accounting
chedules.
Greg Martin

Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
Individual Email | Traditional
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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




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

By what means and by whom were the fines levied? There was absolutley no system in place for penalties within the structure of the ARA/AAR Interchange or Car Service Rules at least within the scope of the STMFC.

Then as now I assume there were many laws that "had no teeth".
This meaning that they are on paper but have no criminal penalties or
way to extract money associated with them.

--
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax--Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS

Greg,

According to 1952 freight car schedules, PRR was running the following east bound livestock trains:

SW-8 rest and water at Columbus no stop Herr's Island

PH-10 lives stock block terminated Herr's Island

VL-6 live stock block terminated Herr's Island

NW-86 rest water feed Columbus no work Herr's Island

NW-88 rest water feed Columbus no work Herr's Island

WS-8 block 2 live stock terminate Herr's Island block 3 continue to Enola without rest etc

FW-8 drop block at Herr;s Island pick-up rested live stock from VL-6, PH-10, WS-8, PH-29 and previous day FW-8.

Looks like the only live stock train beyond Herr's Island that worked Herr's Island was FW-8

So if wheel reports or consists of FW-8 can be located your question should be answered.

SW-8, NW-86, NW-88 would need to show consists from Columbus.

I don't know what PH-29 is. It is not in the freight schedule and should be an west bound or south bound train.

Rich Orr

And Dave, I know that the SP, T&NO, MK&T and other Texas roads would ship watermelons in stock cars too.

- Steve Hedlund, Silver Lake, WA



To: STMFC@...
From: tnbirke@...
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 19:48:02 -0700
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Foreign Road Stock Cars






I wonder if SIT, "Storage in Transit" was in place? If so the original bill-of -lading might be used. In this way a through rate would apply, from origin to destination even though there might be a storage period of some duration in the middle of the move. This worked for grain in the era before 1960 and after. "Milling in transit" was similar for wheat and other products, mostly agricultural

Tom

--- In STMFC@..., guycwilber@... wrote:

Greg Martin wrote:

<<By AAR interchange rules the cars were not to be interchanged (or accepted at interchange) but the fines would be levied to the Home Road for allowing the crew to interchange the car. If the fines were levied they would be minor for the first infraction. There was always the UMLER or ORER to define the car more clearly once offline.>>



By what means and by whom were the fines levied? There was absolutley no system in place for penalties within the structure of the ARA/AAR Interchange or Car Service Rules at least within the scope of the STMFC.

That was my impression... during the steam era the only recourse the receiving road had was to refuse the car... and if it did so, the NYC would have to send it to the RIP track, spot another car, and hire a gang of labors to transfer the load to the new car, providing supervision for the work so the load wasn't pilfered.

Or, someone of suitable authority on the NYC could just call his counterpart on the connecting road and remind him about the last time they'd accepted a junk car from HIM, and all would be good in the world.

The only place the car was likely to cause a problem would be returning the car under load, IF the new shipper needed the light weight of the car... and that was the problem of neither of the two gentlemen listed above.

Dennis

I looked all over trying to find a complete set but was never successful. I came to believe that the neither the ARA nor MCBA ever published a complete lettering set. I've gone into the original MCBA minutes (1905, I believe), and all that was published were a few examples of fonts--the same examples that appear in later Car Builders' Dictionaries/Cyclopedias. If anyone comes up with a set, I'd sure like to see them.

Bob Karig

The hotel does have a shuttle service between the Metra Station and the hotel.

Bob

I'm Not sure just where to post this question so I'm going to cross-post it to all of the groups I'm in.

I'm looking for a sorce for ho scale cars & Trucks RTR, in the 1920's -1940's

Please contact me off list with any help.

Bill Hodkinson

Is there a special rate code at the hotel?

Stuart A. Forsyth
On Mar 19, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Rhbale@... wrote:

RPM-Naperville has found a new home.
The 2011 event will be held October 20-22 at the Hickory Ridge Marriott in
Lisle, Illinois. (call 630-971-5000 for reservations). Lisle is located
about 5 miles east of downtown Naperville.

Richard Bale
News Editor
Read Model Railroad Hobbyist magaZine, its always FREE at
_www.mrhmag.com_ (http://www.mrhmag.com)

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

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

Great news Richard. Finally! Now I can make my Amtrak reservations.

Jim Hayes
Portland Oregon
www.sunshinekits.com

Think about the paperwork for a sec: Farmer Brown puts his 30 steers in the
hands of the SP for transit to the public stockyards in Salt Lake City.
Less than 28 hours later, the SP stops an unloads Farmer Brown's steers for
rest. Once unloaded, how do they know which 30 (nice and fat) steers are
Brown's... and not those 30 old, scrawny, dried up dairy cows Jones has
shipped? Probably the waybill. Some kind of paperwork has to go with the
steers; they have to be in their own pen; they have to continue to their
intended destination. Something has to be done to link Brown's shipment
with the pen Brown's steers are in. No other way would ensure Brown gets
the right auction price in SLC. Does that particular paperwork include the
Car Initial and Number? I dunno, but I'll bet it does. I would imagine
what is used is the waybill. After all, Brown was there when his steers
were loaded; he, like most other consignors, checked his car and was
satisfied *that* car was good.

Rest time has passed and Brown's steers are reloaded. Which is easier for
the people doing the work -- put the steers into the same car as they
arrived OR put them in any car and mess with the waybill (copy to Brown?)?
I'll wager it is the former, just as Schuyler describes, below. It's just
easier.

Dave Nelson

--- In STMFC@..., guycwilber@... wrote:

Greg Martin wrote:
<<By AAR interchange rules the cars were not to be interchanged (or accepted at interchange) but the fines would be levied to the Home Road for allowing the crew to interchange the car.


By what means and by whom were the fines levied? There was absolutley no system in place for penalties within the structure of the ARA/AAR Interchange or Car Service Rules at least within the scope of the STMFC.


Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada

Along the same lines of inquiry, *if* fines were levied by whatever procedures were in place, it would be quite the find if records were still extant for the 1945-1960 period that showed how many times the NYC was fined for Pacemaker cars off home rails with deficient reporting marks.

From what I've read, the decision in 1955 to start painting full reporting marks on shopped Pacemaker cars might have been because of several reasons. One might have been flack the Central received for cars that had, for whatever reason, drifted off home rails with insufficient reporting marks. There is also the 1954 takeover of Central management by the Young/Perlman team. Al Perlman was interested in going in a different direction i.e. Flexi-van. Then, there is also the fact that the whole Pacemaker service concept had never met initial revenue expectations - every section of Interstate highway that opened was another nail in its coffin.

The 1955 decision might very well have been taken from a combination of all these reasons.

By 1960 with the program to mass renumber the 74000 series cars back in to the general boxcar pool, the Central was totally committed to the Flexi-van route for this sort of traffic.

Under Perlman, cars that still had an adequate paint job were, generally speaking, not going to be repainted just for "show". Perlman was more interested in results than appearances, and definitely *not* interested in wasting money for nothing. So the Pacemaker scheme lasted a long time after Pacemaker service itself had been discontinued.

Jim Yaworsky

It's more a matter of what "they" are missisng: an understanding of intelectual property laws, particularly with regard to copyrights. Not uncommon, unfortunately. In the military vehicle world there are several libraries claiming copyright to photographs that have the US Army Signal Corps emblem in the corner!

(Government photographs are "born" in the public domain. It's not that the Government claims copyright and lets us use it free, it's that they are not protectable at all.)

KL

Greg Martin wrote:




<<By AAR interchange rules the cars were not to be interchanged (or accepted at interchange) but the fines would be levied to the Home Road for allowing the crew to interchange the car. If the fines were levied they would be minor for the first infraction. There was always the UMLER or ORER to define the car more clearly once offline.>>



By what means and by whom were the fines levied? There was absolutley no system in place for penalties within the structure of the ARA/AAR Interchange or Car Service Rules at least within the scope of the STMFC.



Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada











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

Denis Blake:

Let me pipe in here if I can. I work with WrightTRAK and we
were looking at doing a project, a NYC car. I contacted the
NYCHS and was told, yes, they have the drawings we are looking
for. We would have to purchase the CD set, I don't remember
what that cost was, but it was NOT cheap. This set included
all sorts of information that we did not need. Then they said
that because we were using information gathered from them that
we would be limited to the amount of product we could produce
from those drawings.

That makes no sense. I have no problem with institutions charging whatever they want for access to or copies of their information, and I certainly understand royalty fees based on publication quantity - when you publish original drawings or photos. But when you use original drawings or photos only as reference materials to produce models, I don't see how the holding institution can restrict the "amount of product".

I work with the Newberry Library and am very familiar with their fee structure and terms of use. I have redrawn a multitude of floor plan, underneath equipment and side elevation drawings from Pullman originals in the Newberry files and am not in violation of the Newberry's terms of use when those (re)drawings show up in kit instructions. What am I missing when it comes to the NYCHS?

Tom Madden

<<The reason I asked, a couple of nights back, about the exact stencilling requirements for interchange, had to do with the Sisk photo referenced earlier in this thread. The car has reporting marks, load limit, light weight, and nothing else: no capacity, no dimensional data, no dates. The picture was taken, the caption says, in 1948 in Kansas City. The NYC doesn't go to KC, so the car is off line. >>


All interchanged cars were to meet the stenciling requirements within Interchange Rules 3, 30, and 86. All cars were also subject to the requirements of the Operating-Transportation Department of the ARA and AAR (post 1934). This includes all provisions within the Car Service Rules and The Standards of The Lettering and Markings of Cars within the Manual of Standard and Recommended Practice of the Association often referenced within the Interchange Rules.


The following entries are from the 1956 Interchange Rules. Though renumbered (several times), the first three paragraphs of Rule 3 are essentially the same as from 1933 forward. Paragraph 7 was added in 1953 with an effective date of January 1, 1955, and Paragraph 8 was added in 1955. Rules 30 and 86 are as they were from the late 1920s with some modifications throughout the years. If you have specific time period questions regarding modifications they can be answered.


INTERCHANGE RULES (Effective January 1, 1956):


Rule 3, Section (s), Paragraph (4) Stenciling: Date built new, month and year, or badge plate giving this information, required on all cars. Date rebuilt, in addition to date built new, month and year or badge plate giving this information, required on all cars rebuilt on or after July 1, 1928. From owners. In event tank and underframe of tank car are built at different times each must bear distinctive dates, the dates on underframe to be date underframe (including trucks) was built new.


Rule 3, Section (s), Paragraph (5) Stenciling: Light weight and capacity in pounds, as provided in Rules 30 and 86, required on all cars. In Interchange. Tank cars and live poultry cars shall be reweighed and remarked by the owners or their authorized representatives.


Rule 3, Section (s), Paragraph (6) Stenciling: Load limit markings, as provided in Rule 30, required all cars except tank cars and live poultry cars. In Interchange.


Rule 3, Section (s), Paragraph (7) Stenciling: Car initials and numbers required on one side of each truck bolster. From Owners.


Rule 3, Section (s), Paragraph (8) Stenciling: All car initials and numbers per pages L-37 through L-39-D of Manual of Standard and Recommended Practice must be legible. From Owners.


Rule 30, Section (F)--Stenciling.


Paragraph (1) Should be in accordance with AAR Standards for Marking and Lettering of Cars.


Paragraph (2) Station symbol and date (month and year) must be stenciled on cars when new and each time re-weighed and re-stenciled. On new cars the word "new" may be substituted for station symbol.


Paragraph (3) When cars are re-stenciled after re-weighing, all old stenciling to be renewed must be obliterated with quick drying paint. It will be necessary only to renew all light-weight numerals, station symbol, date (month and year), and load limit numerals except as provided in Paragraph 6, section (F). The capacity numeral and letters "CAPY", "LD LMT", and "LT WT", when indistinct, must be renewed. light weight stenciling on ends of cars is not permitted and when shown must be obliterated.


Paragraph (4) The light weight stenciling shall be the multiple of 100 lbs. nearest the scale weight, except that when the scale weight indicates an even 50 lbs. the lower multiple shall be used.


Paragraph (5) The LOAD LIMIT, which is the difference between the light weight and the maximum weight on rail, as shown in table in AAR Interchange Rule 86, shall be initially stenciled on all cars (except tank and live poultry cars) by the car owner. The "load limit" is the permissible weight of the lading, including weight of temporary fixtures, also brine and ice in refrigerator cars. Stenciled load limit must not be more than nominal capacity.


Paragraph (6) When account structural limitations or other reasons, car owner has reduced the load limit of a car, a star symbol (*), the size of which shall conform to standard lettering for "LD LMT" shall be placed at immediate left of words "LD LMT", and when thus designated the load limit shall be changed only be the car owner.


Paragraph (7) The NOMINAL CAPACITY in multiples of 1,000 pounds, shall be initially stenciled on car by car owner and must not exceed the stenciled load limit.


Paragraph (8) The CUBIC CAPACITY shall be initially stenciled on cars, by car owner, except that such markings are not required on flat, tank, and live poultry cars.


Rule 86, Section (a), Paragraph (4) All cars to have their light weight and capacity in pounds stenciled on them, as per Section (s), Paragraph (5), Rule 3. Load limit markings are also required on all cars, except tank cars and live poultry cars, as provided in Rule 30.




<<The car-service rules in the 1/43 and 1/53 ORERs state what's supposed to be stencilled, but don't explicitly say what's required for interchange. I don't have a copy of the interchange rules; the group archives yield several comments that "weights" were to be stencilled, but I haven't found a firm statement as to *which* weights. I seek wisdom: does the car in Sisk's photo conform to the requirements, or not?>>


The NYC car in question does not conform to the provisions of the Interchange Rules.



Regards,


Guy Wilber
Reno, Nevada











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

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Just to add some more to the picture:

The series 174000-174999 is listed in the 1953, 1955, 1959, and 1963
Equipment Registers with 50,000 lbs capacity! [snip] drops to 7 cars in 1963!! So clearly
the NYC either got rid of the cars between 1959 and 1963, or reassigned
them to another series.

However, the series 175025-175999 which I think were also Lot 737-B are
all listed with 110,000 lbs capacity. And this series remained populated
in the 1963 and 1965 ORER's. It makes me think that the "Pacemaker" cars
174000-174999 were somehow quite different. Was it just the trucks, or
some other factor?

Tim O'Connor

The 174000 series cars were "assigned" to Pacemaker service. When they were removed from Pacemaker service, they were renumbered by changing the "4" to a "5". There is at least one picture extant that shows the "5" as obviously the only altered number on the CASO website - a quick and minimal renumbering job if there ever was one!

So the 175000 cars are just renumbered 174000 cars. At the same time, most if not all of them had the light "cushion" springs from their "LCL" assignment days replaced with regular springs so they would be available in the general boxcar pool.

Jim Yaworsky

--- In STMFC@..., "Denis Blake" <dblake7@...> wrote:

Let me pipe in here if I can. I work with WrightTRAK and we were looking at
doing a project, a NYC car. I contacted the NYCHS [snip] Needless to say that
project did NOT get done. This is by far the most restrictive policy that
we have ever come across. In this instance it cost NYC modelers a car that
we are certain would have been well received and it badly needed.

Denis Blake
WrightTRAK Railroad Models.

This is distressing to hear and as a member of the NYCSHS all I can say is I don't believe the general membership of the Society knew or would approve of the way this was handled.

I am reporting it to some of the "modeler-friendly" executive members and intend to do everything I can to see nothing like this ever happens again.

Jim Yaworsky

It's on my modeling page: http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/modeling/SLSF_rebuilt.html Charlie recently asked me to do the decals so they're availble now along with a set for a similar ACL rebuild.

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html