Bob - from my incomplete collection of loose ATSF 211/4 folio sheets, her "end knees" and pressed steel sides looks to be from the GA-68 to 70 class (as well as perhaps later) first issued in 1949 by

"Many vertical shaft/horizontal wheel installations had gearing to assist the brakeman in applying the brakes and would therefore have been considered "allowed" under these rules." Yes...two examples

Photos: Santa Fe Gondola 175309 Four photos from the Kansas State Historical Society taken in 1960: https://www.kansasmemory.org/item/310193 Click on the photos to enlarge them. Bob

Photo: Santa Fe Flat Car 92395 Fair photo from the Kansas State Historical Society of a Class Ft-N flat car taken in 1958: https://www.kansasmemory.org/item/51166 Click on the photos to enlarge

Photo: Santa Fe Gondola Fairly good interior shot of unidentified drop-end gondola from the Kansas State Historical Society taken in 1950: https://www.kansasmemory.org/item/50620 Click on the photo

This was one of 7,500 CP boxcars with inside height of 8-7 and 5-0 doors, built in 1929 and 1930 by CCF, NSC and ECC. Numbered 240000-247499. Sometimes nicknamed ‘minibox’ due to their relatively

Bob, Thanks again. Actually, I found this document to work fine, although one negative is flipped over. There are several photos showing that the side edge of the roof panels sits well inside the

Bob, Since about 2005, a list of the AAR interchange rule dates has been posted in the FILES section of this group😉 It is even in both WORD and EXCEL formats depending on your preference. That

I built all of the Sunshine M55 kits and I do remember a gap between the edge of the roof and the sides...in other words the roof did not overlap the top edge of the sides. This was not uncommon with

I have the M-55H kit. The problem with the kit is not the roof. The end casting for the car is slightly too wide - less than 1/8" A razor saw blade kerf and a bit of

I understand that in 1937 power (geared) handbrakes required on all newly-built or newly-rebuilt cars. Were non-power handbrakes every specifically outlawed or banned? Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA

That reference to ARA Type D couplers adds more confusion, because the Type D, and all other couplers designed around the ARA No.10 knuckle contour were actually bigger than what would be a "full

Are you sure the roof is too narrow and not the ends to wide? I have seen both in resin kits. Compare against a stock AAR boxcar or plans before doing anything drastic. Bill Darnaby

The 49-50 Car Builders has the M55A plans on page 302 that illustrate the unique roof contour as well as the late Duryea UF. Bill Darnaby

One more source: October 24, 1902 Railway Age, p. 428 https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Railway_Age.html?id=n8A6AQAAMAAJ David Thompson

And notice the square shaft on the brake wheel. Where is Bill Welch with his reel of square wire now that I see proof that I need some? Doug Harding www.iowacentralrr.org

Not all of Colorado was full size couplers. The Colorado & Southern, Colorado & North Western, used 3/4 size couplers. The Florence & Cripple Creek and Uintah Ry did as well I think. My guess would

That verifies my understandings. Also quite nice for me and my choice of couplers for my Pacific Coast narrow gauge models. Thanks Randy, -Andy Carlson Ojai CA

Bob wrote: “Photo: CP Boxcar 242550 An end shot” Note that the gear within the makeshift housing at the bottom of the shaft appears to have broken and was forced off center (to the left). The

https://realstmfc.groups.io/g/main/album?id=43505 The photos are of a Soo car, which did not have the lower end panel, but the drawing does have the lower ends. I think it's a match for the M55a.