Date   

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:

Deciding to model that, I
put .010" x .060" styrene strips where the car lines had been.
That's
too thick -- should be more like .0014" to represent 1/8" sheets
overlapping. (Various list members suggested thinner plastic foils
or
strips, which however tended to crinkle when I glued them.) So I
filed the strips back down to a thickness somewhere near right (just
thick enough that the file didn't tear them -- should've switched to
sandpaper), and feathered the edges. I haven't seen a down-on photo
of the prototype roof, but from a "ground" angle my roof looks OK.<<

Foil, paper or parcel tape cut into strips the width of the panels
works well for this sort of thing - just overlap the strips a scale
6
inches or so and press down. If you're using paper, seal it with
shellac before painting

Aidrian


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)

Bruce Smith
 

Alan asked:

Thanks to Bruce and Al for the info - I too recall a recent(ish)
discussion about the roofs of these cars, but also couldn't find it in
the group archive.

Any chance of a pic or two of your welded roof Bruce??
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."
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0


Re: NMRA

Rupert & Maureen <gamlenz@...>
 

Al

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

Tim O'Connor
 

There is no XF type listing in the 1953 or 1972 ORER's. I think
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 general
service box car, but usually with greater cubic capacity"
Rupert Gamlen
Interesting how "XF" morphed from "Furniture" to "Food" in later years. In the future for this
list.
SGL


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, &copy;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

Tim O'Connor
 

I've seen photos of cars on trailers on flat cars on the
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 (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


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,

It's worth noting that the Santa Fe's "Fe" classification (as in
"Fe-P") stood for "furniture and automobile" cars. Automobiles seem
to have become the more important business category of the two,
considering the number of cars fitted with auto-loading and parts
racks and assigned to service for specific manufacturers.
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:

Brian,

The mainstream means of automobile transporting out of the assembly
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.

Al Kresse

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "brianehni" <behni@...>
I'd like to model one of these as an early TOFC load, but can't
seem to find any plans.

Has anyone here got a set that would look right for mid-50's?

Brian Ehni

P.S. I seem to be unable to post messages here and on PCL via
email; I have to come to the
web site; anyone else having problems?




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


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.

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