|
Re: Georgia RR cars (was Not boxcar red)
Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
I used Bare-Metal foil to add "new steel" to a Westerfield CASO
boxcar, using this photo for reference. http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/caso-138113-1.jpg After painting the car with Scalecoat #2 Red Oxide, I was very pleased with the effect created by using this foil. The stuff is about .001-.002" thick. Steve Lucas. --- In STMFC@..., "Aidrian Bridgeman-Sutton" <smokeandsteam@...> wrote: That'sput .010" x .060" styrene strips where the car lines had been.Deciding to model that, I too thick -- should be more like .0014" to represent 1/8" sheetsor strips, which however tended to crinkle when I glued them.) So I6 inches or so and press down. If you're using paper, seal it with |
|
|
|
Re: New Standards for Freight Cars Models
Larry Grubb <larry450sl@...>
Kurt,
It is wrong to belittle the significant contributions of those on this list who have been instrumental in raising the quality standards of prototypical freight car models and pretend they are simply having fun and taking the easy way out. Expressing their frustration with the existing standards & the difficulty of updating those standards is not carping. Rather than suggest that those who are already making a large contribution must do even more, you should ask yourself what you will do to contribute to the effort to improve freight car models. Larry Grubb Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...> wrote: Unfortunately, none of this is as easy or fun as carping about how nothing good ever happens anymore . . .. KL |
|
|
|
Re: Georgia RR cars (was Not boxcar red)
Alan asked:
Thanks to Bruce and Al for the info - I too recall a recent(ish)I've posted two shots of my model to the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Georgia%20RR%20USRA%20box% 20car%20model/GeorgiaUSRA.jpg http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Georgia%20RR%20USRA%20box% 20car%20model/GeorgiaUSRA2.jpg Hope this helps! Regards Bruce Bruce F. Smith Auburn, AL http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/index.pl/bruce_f._smith2 "Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield." __ / \ __<+--+>________________\__/___ ________________________________ |- ______/ O O \_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ | | / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 \ | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__|| |/_____________________________\|_|________________________________| | O--O \0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0 |
|
|
|
Re: NMRA
Rupert & Maureen <gamlenz@...>
Al
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Did you consider using an ATA carnet depending, of course, on the value of your goods? They are accepted by Customs in most countries including both U.S. and Canada, and remove most issues relating to the export and re-import of trade samples. With the NAFTA Agreement, is there still a trans-border issue? Rupert Gamlen Auckland NZ
----- Original Message -----
From: " Westerfield" <westerfield@...> To: <STMFC@...> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:31 PM Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: NMRA We had an inventory of everything we were bringing in, told the officials this was our first time and were processed in less than 15 minutes. .......... The one problem we had was exiting the US because they had no process for our declaring what we might be bringing back and no place to park at the customs station. ........Evidently there is no easy process for bringing stuff back. - Al Westerfield |
|
|
|
Re: New Standards for Freight Cars Models
Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Brock OK, I'll bite. First, what are you talking about? IOW, give me an example of a "standard". For example...Coupler or a coupler pocket? Wheel dimensions? Truck sideframe sizes? Axle lengths? Rivet sizes? Weight? Grab iron sizes? Second, what do you propose that "these people" do to manufacturers that produce something that fails to meet these standards? ----- Original Message ----- Thing 1, I'm referring to messages such as the ones of 18 May stating: "We're on our own here, guys. Almost without exception, the trucks, wheelsets, axles, couplers, etc. which serious scale modelers are using because they're superior in appearance/performance do not conform to the old (very old!) NMRA standards, and the NMRA is in a state of permanent paralysis about trying to update the standards. Discussions of the need for this are pointless on this list; it ain't gonna happen." and "The NMRA in fact IS relevant to this list in one particular: modeling standards. The now-ancient existing standards could certainly use updating in several areas, and I think the desirability of such action has been made clear in several posts on the list. Unfortunately, it ain't happening, and I'm among those who fear it never will." "Serious scale modelers" need/want either new or revised standards. The NMRA (of which I little knowledge, less interest, and zero history) is apparently never going to do anything. If I'm proposing anything it's that the luminaries in Prototype Modeling Community do it themselves and ignore the NMRA altogether. Write up what you think needs to be standardized and send it out to the manufacturers and tell them why it's important and desirable for them to conform. Send it to the magazines and tell them to publish them and explain why the new standards are important. Post it the STMFC Files section and on the historical societies' modeling pages. Do the work, make the case, spread the word. Thing 2, They should probably treat non-compliant manufacturers the same way the NMRA does now, which, I believe, is to do nothing. In fact, the NMRA injects itself deeper into the process with their "warrants" than (successful) real life standardization organizations like ASME or ASTM. ASME-authored National Standards include in the front matter: "ASME does not 'approve', 'rate', or 'endorse' any item, construction, proprietary device, or activity." The Standards are approved by consensus and are voluntary, however dang near every manufactured item worth anything claims to follow them. Unfortunately, none of this is as easy or fun as carping about how nothing good ever happens anymore . . .. KL |
|
|
|
Westerfield website and GNRHS reference sheets
gn3397 <heninger@...>
Group,
I would like to take this opportunity to let you all know that the GNRHS is now selling Reference Sheets to non-members, and accepts PayPal. Previously, you had to join the society to purchase reference sheets. Reference Sheets are folios dealing with a single topic, and there are several pertaining to GN steam era freight cars that are of interest to the members of this list. The GNRHS website is located at gnrhs.org, as well as an index to all issues. I have been a member of the GNRHS for 19 years, but otherwise have no financial interest. Also, kudos to Mr. Westerfield for his revamped website. I find it easier to navigate and visually more appealing. The R7s are now available for order. Again, no affiliation except as a very satisfied customer. Hopefully this message doesn't violate list rules. Sincerely, Robert D. Heninger Stanley, ND |
|
|
|
Re: NMRA
Westerfield <westerfield@...>
The NMRA had set up an inexpensive group rate with a professional firm for taking displays and merchandise into Canada - $100 per company. When most dropped out the program was dropped.
With the help of Sylvan models and the internet we were able to do the process ourselves at no cost. We had an inventory of everything we were bringing in, told the officials this was our first time and were processed in less than 15 minutes. The one problem we had was exiting the US because they had no process for our declaring what we might be bringing back and no place to park at the customs station. I had to park on the side of the road and run across 4 lanes of traffic to get there. The same thing happened when leaving Canada. I had to sneak in the employees' entrance. Evidently there is no easy process for bringing stuff back. - Al Westerfield |
|
|
|
Re: New Standards for Freight Cars Models
Mike Brock <brockm@...>
Kurt Laughlin writes:
"I'd suggest that these people propose the new standards themselves and offer them to the various manufacturers, perhaps as part of their normal contacts. The folks here also seem to be well represented as authors in the hobby press, so getting the pubs on board - and the word out - ought to be easier than for us lesser mortals." OK, I'll bite. First, what are you talking about? IOW, give me an example of a "standard". For example...Coupler or a coupler pocket? Wheel dimensions? Truck sideframe sizes? Axle lengths? Rivet sizes? Weight? Grab iron sizes? Second, what do you propose that "these people" do to manufacturers that produce something that fails to meet these standards? Mike Brock |
|
|
|
New file uploaded to STMFC
STMFC@...
Hello,
This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the STMFC group. File : /Georgia RR USRA box car model/GeorgiaUSRA.jpg Uploaded by : smithbf36832 <smithbf@...> Description : top down view of Tichy model of Georgia RR box with welded roof You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Georgia%20RR%20USRA%20box%20car%20model/GeorgiaUSRA.jpg To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.htmlfiles Regards, smithbf36832 <smithbf@...> |
|
|
|
Re: Furniture Boxcars
There is no XF type listing in the 1953 or 1972 ORER's. I think
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
the large "XF" stencil used by Santa Fe and a few other roads was more in the way of "advertising" and was not an AAR car type. If "XF" morphed, it morphed into XL or XM. Tim O'Connor The MCB designation was "XF - Furniture - similar in design to generalInteresting how "XF" morphed from "Furniture" to "Food" in later years. In the future for this |
|
|
|
New file uploaded to STMFC
STMFC@...
Hello,
This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the STMFC group. File : /Georgia RR USRA box car model/GeorgiaUSRA2.jpg Uploaded by : smithbf36832 <smithbf@...> Description : Modified Tichy model of Georgia RR USRA rebuilt box car You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Georgia%20RR%20USRA%20box%20car%20model/GeorgiaUSRA2.jpg To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.htmlfiles Regards, smithbf36832 <smithbf@...> |
|
|
|
Re: Shipping Sears Homes
David Jobe, Sr.
Hello Guy,
By far, the best overall publication that would cover your, and perhapsothers, interests is "Additionally Speaking" by Laurie A. Flori, ©2005,ISBN: 0-9773635-0-3 which covers the largest single order for SearsHomes by our old friend, Standard Oil (of Indiana). They purchased 192homes from Sears with 156 going to the Standard Addition ofCarlinville, 12 going to Schoper, and the balance going to Wood River,Illinois across from the Standard Oil refinery. And, her liberallyillustrated book does a very nice job of putting it all into contextwith both the railroads and Standard Oil's coal mines. At Carlinville, "A temporary spur was laid into the Standard Additionand the houses came via boxcars on the C&A railroad. ... The boxcars were then let off on the spur and manually maneuvered, or pulledby horses or mules, to their building site. Each Standard Additionhouse came in 2 boxcars. The 1st boxcar carried the basics to raisethe house. The 2nd boxcar carried everything needed to finish thehouse. Each house kit also included two trees for the front yard. Larger houses sold by Sears were sent in more boxcars. The largesthouse that Sears sold, the Magnolia, took 7 boxcars to ship." At the time Laurie wrote the book, 152 homes remained of the original156 homes. Since then, one more was lost due to a natural gasexplosion in August 2006. Her book is available through Amazon, or youmay contact her directly at "flori AT frontiernet DOT net", with theappropriate changes. If anyone has any further questions, please feelfree to ask me or Laurie directly. And, for the record, I have noconnection to Laurie other than being a very satisfied customer. Hope this helps, David Jobe, Sr. Saint Ann, Missouri guycwilber@... wrote: Sears produced "kits" for entire homes from 1908 thru 1940. Thereare several publications on the history of the production. Has anyone hereexamined any of these? Is the history of shipment by railroads covered within? I am interested in the plant location(s) as well as shipping points and would be grateful for any shared thoughts. Regards, Guy Wilber West Bend, WI b |
|
|
|
Re: 1950's Auto Transport Trailers
I've seen photos of cars on trailers on flat cars on the
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
CB&Q and C&NW in Chicago, the CNJ in Pennsylvania, the PRR, and of course it was common on the SP for a time. A 75' PRR/TTX flat car of the mid 1950's could carry 8 automobiles on 2 trailers, as could SP Clejan flats. Tim O'Connor
At 5/21/2008 09:04 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
Bruce Smith wrote:However, the original question asked about TOFC auto carriers (ieThere are two photos of this exact thing, on SP, in my Vol. 3 on |
|
|
|
Re: Furniture Boxcars
Cyril Durrenberger
As a followup to this and more generally, most early furniture cars had one door that was wider than used on most box cars. Cars with two doors (or "1 1/2" doors)followed later, generally around 1910, or 1909 as mentioned in this post.
The D&IR rebuilt a few box cars with one side door that was 12' wide. This was later replaced with two doors. Cyril Durrenberger Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote: On May 21, 2008, at 7:10 AM, Andy Sperandeo wrote: Hi Bob,Andy's response is correct as far as it goes, but let me take it a bit further. The Santa Fe began purchasing larger, taller (for their day) box cars with wide doors, which were identified in freight car rosters as furniture cars, well before the turn of the 20th century. When the freight car fleet was reorganized in 1902 and the classification system developed, the Fe- symbol was used for those cars, which by that time included among the earliest fifty foot cars built for an American railroad, and the cars were stenciled "Furniture." Additional Fe- class cars began to be acquired in 1909 in both forty and fifty foot varieties with ten foot wide 1-1/2 doors and full-opening end doors at the A ends, and by that time the shipment of automobiles had become important enough that those cars were stenciled "Automobile and Furniture." That practice continued until the late 1920s, when (beginning in 1928 with the delivery of the fifty foot double door Fe-S class) the stenciling was simplified to "Automobile," though the class designation was never changed. In the 1930s, many Fe- class cars were equipped with Evans double deck auto loading racks and, as the auto industry diversified geographically, a growing number of cars were also fitting with loading racks for auto and truck engines, transmissions, and chassis and body parts. The Santa Fe continued to apply the Fe- class symbol to large cars with double doors until the 1960s, when the construction of large Bx- class box cars with wide door openings rendered the distinction between Bx- and Fe- classes moot. Regardless of what they were called, the general-service Fe- class cars continued to be used to ship such bulky but relatively light cargoes as furniture, pianos, farm machinery, motor trucks and busses, aircraft parts, vacation trailers, and even baled hay. Even the cars equipped with Evans racks could be used for such lading on back-hauls, since the racks were designed to fold up out of the way against the car roofs. Richard Hendrickson |
|
|
|
Re: 1950's Auto Transport Trailers
Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
Al and all,
The funny part of some of these early auopt carriers was the way they were designed. Until recent years when it was sold out to Hertz one of the better known brands of auto-carriers were the Delevan trailers. A daughter of the founder of the company is a friend whom I asked some ten years ago if any plans for post-war car trailers that Delevan constructed might still exist. She checked with her oldest brother and was told that their father never had blueprints drawn up as we might expect. Rather, they covered a wall the length of what they inteded to construct with paper, drew the inteded trailer on the paper and went to work to construct it! No, I am not joking. Many of the parts were standard items purchased outside, axles, wheels and such. The rest was constructed of standard steel shapes and sheet metal in much the same way that Mather put their railroad cars together. Guess those were just simpler times but "Delevan Delivers" with the workhorse emblem trailers were still often seen until about 2000. Don Valentine --- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote: plants in the 1950's was still auto-rack box cars. They were beginning to use direct haul truck tractor (cab over engine) and trailers in the early 1950s. There were a few (two or three? GTW, PRR? others?) experimental flat cars with Evans Products racks made in the mid-1950s. The C&O made up drawings and got patents in 1956 but didn't appear to have made any six-auto, double deck 56-ft flat cars. The 85-ft TOFs (two truck trailers) showed up in the late 50s. Direct drive up the end with ramps flat cars with racks didn't become popular in the assembly plants until the mid 60s. If you can go back to 1900 you can find 36-ft wooden flat cars with wooden side rails/guides to ship buggies and carriages on. seem to find any plans. email; I have to come to the web site; anyone else having problems? |
|
|
|
Re: Prototypes For Pacific Electric Boxcar Models?
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Ben Hom wrote:
PE 10000-10399, Class B-50-14. The Accurail models are stand-ins; these prototypes had radial roofs.Wow! I've never seen you so tactful, Ben. Accurails are indeed single-sheathed with Z-bar braces. After that . . . 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 |
|
|
|
Re: 1950's Auto Transport Trailers
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Al Kresse wrote:
The mainstream means of automobile transporting out of the assembly plants in the 1950's was still auto-rack box cars.Nope. After 1950 it declined sharply, and by 1959 the railroads were carrying under 10 per cent of the new autos. Introduction of auto racks on flat cars in 1959 reversed this trend; by 1966 nearly half of all new autos were shipped by rail. 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 |
|
|
|
Re: 1950's Auto Transport Trailers
Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Bruce Smith wrote:
However, the original question asked about TOFC auto carriers (ie autos on truck trailers in turn on flat cars), and frankly, I'm not sure that ever occurred, or if it did, it was both extremely rare and after the time-frame of this list.There are two photos of this exact thing, on SP, in my Vol. 3 on flat cars, pp. 302, 303, and they are 1959-model cars. But I don't know how rare it was. 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 |
|
|
|
Re: Receiving Sears Homes
Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
"Buildings" doesn't necessarily mean houses. They could have been surplus Quonset huts or other prefabricated industrial/commercial buildings.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
KL
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Mathu But Lustron stopped production in 1950, so I wonder what the four carloads of prefabricated buildings in 1954 were? |
|
|
|
New Standards for Freight Cars Models
Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
It seems to me that there are a number of influential and respected people on this list that are of the opinion that certain (as yet unidentified) standards are needed to help Prototype Freight Car modeling in particular and model railroading in general. I'd suggest that these people propose the new standards themselves and offer them to the various manufacturers, perhaps as part of their normal contacts. The folks here also seem to be well represented as authors in the hobby press, so getting the pubs on board - and the word out - ought to be easier than for us lesser mortals. (GWMRG/MRG published the with N-Trak standards back in the '70/80s, as an example.)
Good standards that make the hobby and hobby industry better will stand on their own feet whether it gets some hobby club's imprimatur or not. KL |
|
|