Date   

Re: So why are we doing this?

Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@...>
 

On Dec 12, 3:27pm, Richard Hendrickson wrote:
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: So why are we doing this?
3. I'm tired of the same old topics being discussed at length every few
months, often with more heat than light, prompted by new subscribers who
weren't around when they were discussed before (and haven't consulted
the
digest to find that out).
This, in my opinion, is one of the great weaknesses of Mr. Hosker's list.
The last time I tried to search the archives, well, I couldn't. Suppose
I want to know how to tell a correct RC R-30-12-9 from the incorrect
version.
I have no intention of performing 48 different searches for "Red Caboose
PFE" (one for each month in the archive).

Thus, if I wanted to know, I'd have to ask again. (Actually, I keep my
own personal archive of messages that I think will be of future interest.
But I shouldn't have to.)

Regards,

-Jeff

--
Jeff Aley, Development Engineer jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
Graphics Components Division
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: So why are we doing this?

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

I agree with Dick Harley. I would like someplace where there is only serious
discussion of freight cars, and not a lot of chit-chat, and no declarations of one's
preference for the "three foot rule" etc. Limiting it to pre-1960 freight cars is not
entirely my preference but if that's how you all feel... People like myself and Bill
Kelly and Jim Eager are seriously interested in post-1960 freight cars too, and at
the moment there is no mailing list other than FCL for that.

An egroups moderator has the power to approve or eject subscribers. I have
occasionally reminded steamloco members not to stray from the subject of the
mailing list, and I haven't noticed any serious violations. Although the recent
flareup of discussions of styrene and plastics is kinda pushing the envelope...

P.S. Dick, thanks for posting the Union Pacific drawings file. I think that type
of information will make the STMFC a useful resource. Dick's "three useful
messages a week" sounds like a worthy goal.

P.P.S. How do people feel about binaries attached to messages? Sometimes
it would be just so much easier to SHOW people what you're talking about
rather than try to describe it.


Re: So why are we doing this?

Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Richard writes on his reasoning for a new group:

1. ... 33,000 gal. tank cars....
2. I'm tired of being abused as an elitist snob....
3. I'm tired of the same old topics being discussed ... by new
subscribers who
weren't around when they were discussed before.
Item 1 can be addressed by establishing a different, group. The only way to
deal with item 2 is to keep the new group closed, by invitation only. Dunno
if egroups allows for that. Dunno what Mike wants either.

At any rate, what I'd like is (no particular order):

- Fine scale modeling of freight cars. Model railroading including freight
cars is meerly a coincidental interest. I can join Jim Six's group or stay
with the FC list would my priorites to reverse.

- my personal interests of historical research at the fleet level (ORER, ICC
stuff, industrial stuff, etc.) remaining welcome.

- All historical material relevant to support fine scale modeling.

- Persons having both adult opinions and skins.

- I understand opinions vary on when the steam era ended. I think <=1956 is
generous.

- While not yet an author, I have appreciated and learned from much of the
discussion over on the FC list on issues faced by authors of material on
these topics.

I could go on....

On a technical level, I do like egroups web access, searching capability,
file storage, and opinion polling -- very much an improvement compared to
FC.

Dave Nelson


Re: So why are we doing this?

Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@...>
 

As we continue to talk about talking about freight cars, :-) WRT binaries,
they shouldn't be mailed out, but put in the shared files area. The
ReeferMadness list (all refrigerator cars, all the time) does this quite
effectively, though most of the images are of (yuk) mechanical reefers.
The PrototypeModelers have recently uploaded sections of video (!) that
show specific freight car door hardware. [Now *that's* multimedia at its
finest!]

Regards,

-Jeff

P.S. Has Harley unsubscribed yet? I don't think we've had an actual
freight car discussion yet...

On Dec 12, 7:32pm, Tim O'Connor wrote:
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: So why are we doing this?
P.P.S. How do people feel about binaries attached to messages? Sometimes
it would be just so much easier to SHOW people what you're talking about
rather than try to describe it.
--
Jeff Aley, Development Engineer jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
Graphics Components Division
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: Used book sites

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

In the interest of making the STMFC more useful, I will compile a simple
document containing links to internet railroad book dealers, and will keep
it reasonably up to date, and the document will be maintained in the files
area of STMFC. I will start with Jeff's list and a few dozen (!) that I have
found myself over the past few years...

This is one of the features about egroups that I really like. For example a
member of the steamloco group compiled a list of prototypes for HO
scale non-brass steam locomotive models. That type of thing has real
value, IMO.

If people wanted to use STMFC to preview articles, or just "publish" in
the files area, I think that would be great! We could use STMFC for
serious sharing and collaboration, whereas FCL is for general "probing"
for information and modeling chat.

P.S. As Jeff notes, there is a difference between booksellers and "index"
(or "portal") web sites. I will keep them separate in the list.

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Aley - GCD PE <jaley@pcocd2.intel.com>
To: <STMFC@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Used book sites


While we're still off topic, you may also find http://www.bibliofind.com/
to be helpful. Note that neither Advanced Book Exchange (ABE) nor
Bibliofind are actual booksellers. Instead they contain listings from
many smaller book dealers. As a result, each web site might find the same
book.

Other search sites:

http://www.bookfinder.com/
http://www.ippi.com/antiquarian-archive.html
http://www.alibris.com/home.cfm


Re: Used book sites

Richard Hendrickson
 

Thanks, Jeff. Just what I need - another way to spend money!

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: So why are we doing this?

Richard Hendrickson
 

Dave Nelson writes:

- I understand opinions vary on when the steam era ended. I think <=1956 is
generous.
That's probably about right; some steam survived later, but not much.
However, I'm inclined toward ca. 1960 as a cutoff because, give or take a
year or two, that was the beginning of what I regard as the modern era:
roller bearings, cushion underframes, mechanical reefers, etc. Prior to
1960, only a few more or less experimental cars had those features, and
freight car technology wasn't much different than in 1950.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


The STMFC...Objectives, Reasons and Processes

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Guys,
There have been several messages regarding the objectives, reasons for
initiating and methodology of the Steam Era Freight Car Group including its
relation to the current FCL. A few answers are probably appropriate. First,
let me present the description of the group that I have placed in the Egroup
description area:

"The purpose of this list is to discuss all aspects of North American
freight cars of the steam era [ 1900-1960 ]. The objectives include the
sharing of information about railroad freight cars including their operation
and various techniques of building models of them. Emphasis is to be placed
on the study of the prototype with a goal of producing models of them with
as great a degree of accuracy as possible."

As I mentioned in my introductory message, I have felt for a year or so that
a steam era FC list might have advantages. The obvious one is that the range
of historical subject matter will be reduced. Currently the completely open
range of the FCL allows many more posts than might be produced by one
confined to a specific period. A second and, perhaps, more significant
advantage is that there is a more specific objective than merely having
discussions about freight cars. To use an analogy, one might consider the
FCL as the NMRA and the Steam Era Freight Car Group as a SIG.

Some have expressed a hope that messages might be greatly reduced. I make no
claim for this. After all, I am not exactly innocent of producing strictly
technical posts and can run my keyboard with the best. I will attempt to
generate an archival capability to perhaps provide a solution for those
preferring reduced numbers of posts.

It has been pointed out that we see the same subjects discussed every now
and then on the FCL. This will no doubt continue but probably to a lesser
extent on the STMFC. Jeff Aley asks, "should I just commit the ACF book and
RPC to memory?" [ Actually, Jeff is one that just might be able to do it ].
I don't think so.

Dave Nelson mentions that we should have "adult opinions and skins." I
believe those are admiral traits which we should emulate. However, I would
add that we are discussing a hobby. I strongly suggest that we not overlook
the value of humor in our discussions.

Currently, membership is open without restrictions. As moderator, I can
require approval at any time.

There has been mention of the time period. I based this on the sad fact that
the last Big Boy ran in 1959. I added one yr because I wanted to [ and
Richard suggested it ].

I would appreciate any suggestions you guys have regarding the above
comments and any other views.

I would also mention that, while I will be acting as moderator, I am asking
Richard Hendrickson, Tony Thompson, and Tim O'Connor to be unofficial
"board" members to keep me in line. I would also ask Jeff Aley and Tim to
assist in using the Egroup technical capabilities.

Mike Brock
STMFC Moderator............now....about those N&W hoppers...


Re: The steam era, 1960

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

Mike and all,

Didn't UP run steam into 1960? I think 4-8-8-4's would have to qualify
as legitimate steam...

For myself, I prefer the cutoff date of December 1966, when the current
appearance of house cars was ordained, i.e. running boards were no longer
required on box cars and reefers. Also, by 1966, reefers in ice service had
declined precipitously.

Some Classic Trains was published in 1964, so that is another milestone
date for me, very close to the end of genuine "classy varnish" on western
railroads. (The Seattle World's Fair of 1964-1965 was the last high point
for NP and GN before the rapid slide towards 1971.)

So what say you, steam fans? Can I offer you research into Hydroframe
60 PS-1's, or 90 ton, 4000 cubic foot covered hoppers, or 86 foot box
cars, as well as end-of-life dispositions of single sheathed cars and wood
ice reefers? All these things happened in the tumultuous early 1960's.

To say nothing of piggyback cars and trailers of the 1950's up to 1966!

----- Original Message -----
From: <MDelvec952@aol.com>
Subject: [STMFC] The steam era, 1960


It is commonly regarded by the more formal historian and professional museum
community that the end of the steam era was 1960. The late 1950s still saw
some Class 1 steam, while the 1960s saw steam only on a few short lines and
in Canada. Rolling stock, too, made a big leap in the 1960s, as Richard
pointed out.


Re: The steam era, 1960

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Tim O'Connor...who will probably have to retake his class on steam
history... writes:

Didn't UP run steam into 1960? I think 4-8-8-4's would have to qualify
as legitimate steam...
1960? UP STILL runs steam. 844...renumbered to 8444 for awhile....has never
been removed from the roster. It and 3985 still provide SOME degree of class
to today's RRs. OTOH, the last Big Boy ran in '59.

For myself, I prefer the cutoff date of December 1966, when the current
appearance of house cars was ordained, i.e. running boards were no longer
required on box cars and reefers.
Hard to imagine the age of steam to have run to '66 even with UP's single
locomotive. The trouble with that date is it a bit arbitrary...with little
supporting evidence. Add to that, both Supreme Courts will overrule it.

Mike Brock


Re: The steam era, 1960

Richard Hendrickson
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

So what say you, steam fans? Can I offer you research into Hydroframe
60 PS-1's, or 90 ton, 4000 cubic foot covered hoppers, or 86 foot box
cars, as well as end-of-life dispositions of single sheathed cars and wood
ice reefers? All these things happened in the tumultuous early 1960's.

To say nothing of piggyback cars and trailers of the 1950's up to 1966!
BOOORING! Let's hear it for Andrews trucks, truss rod underframes, outside
metal roofs, and Murphy corrugated ends.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: So why are we doing this?

Gail & Tom Madden <tgmadden@...>
 

So.... I see fourteen names in the "Members" list so far, all but two of
whom I either know personally or have had extensive e-mail correspondence
with. I'm flattered to be included, but I figure I'm already part of this
particular group with or without a new list.

I like the thought of some sort of refuge where we can go off and discuss
things candidly without being badgered by the Great Unwashed, but we need to
be careful - from their viewpoint there's no discernable difference between
the Algonquin Round Table and a bunch of elite snobs holding forth in
private.

There were 199 members in the Passenger Car List when I took it to eGroups
in late September. There are now 271. On eGroups you'll be noticed and, like
it or not, you'll end up with an uncontrolled body of subscribers. If the
purpose of this list is to escape from the newbies, vesties, train set
whatevers and general nuisances, there must be some sort of control on who
subscribes. I'm not advocating this, just pointing out that when you
publicize paradise, it eventually gets overrun.

One other thing to watch out for - the archives are open to any subscriber
at any time, on out into the future. In these very early posts some of us
may be a bit too candid because it's "just among friends". Mike, you might
want to think about deleting some of these "board of directors" posts from
the archives eventually.

Tom "devil's advocate" Madden
who thinks the only good freight cars are red, black, orange or yellow, and
who favors cutting things off just before the McGinnis NH/B&M color
explosions.


Attention!

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Attention! Achtung! Attencion!

The STMFC is pleased to announce that Byron Rose will be returning to active
participation by joining the STMFC. Although Byron indicates he is going to
do it on a trial basis, we will at least have his in depth and "interesting"
comments and views for awhile. I look forward to his remarks.

Mike Brock
STMFC moderator...What have I done...<G>


Re: The steam era, 1960

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

Richard, you're living in the past. ;o)


Oh wait, so am I... but less past than you are. And Al Westerfield is
even more past than either of us. Has anyone passed Al's past as yet?
And is Dick Harley still with us?

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com>

BOOORING! Let's hear it for Andrews trucks, truss rod underframes, outside
metal roofs, and Murphy corrugated ends.


Re: So why are we doing this?

Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

From: Gail & Tom Madden [mailto:tgmadden@worldnet.att.net]
I like the thought of some sort of refuge where we can go off
and discuss things candidly without being badgered by the
Great Unwashed, but we need to be careful - from their
viewpoint there's no discernable difference between
the Algonquin Round Table and a bunch of elite snobs
holding forth in private.
Per egroups terms of service:
Group Content may be private or public. If a group is intended to be
private, it is the sole responsibility of the member who has created the
list (the "Moderator") to use the Service properly to make sure that such
privacy is achieved, including by establishing appropriate policies for the
group and securely managing passwords and other access capabilities.

If there is a desire to go private, egroups allows one to do so. Is there
such a desire and/or is that what you want Mike?

Dave Nelson


Re: The steam era, 1960

John W Nehrich <nehrij@...>
 

I think that if Mike Brock does all the work of keeping the list going,
etc., he should be left alone to pick the cutoff date and to go beyond it
at times if he thinks it relevant (sometimes a discussion of a new
technology makes you understand more about the whys and wherefores of the
older - at least that what's I've found).

(Not to get off topic, but since I'm already sending this, and
there is all this blank space below.)

At the RPI club, we struggled for years over the definition of
"steam-era". We had a working concept, but it was hard to explain to
non-modelers what the significance was, and also why we weren't that
concerned with the 1840's. It was a book by James Kunstler ("Geography Of
Nowhere") which opened our eyes to the society-wide changes that were
going on, that had impact on railroads. After all, what would the choice
of the motive power at the front end have to do with the freight cars
trailing along?

We have started using the term "Downtown Century", to represent
the 100 years or so from the Civil War to the early '60's when the
downtown of a city or even just a village was the center of life. And the
reason was that this was where the railroad interface took place (mainly
the depot, but also the freight depot). It was the rise of mass
transportation using rails (railroads AND street cars) that led to the
modern idea of the classic idea of the city. And while it goes back to
the 1860's, it took a few more decades for the institutions to catch up
(office buildings, hotels, resturants, giant theaters, department stores).

And the bottom dropped out with the shift to individual
transportion - i.e., the auto, and the decline of the downtown to the
abandoned "inner city". (We keep thinking of the 1960's pop song
"Downtown"
which extols the excitement of the area, a place to go just to be where
the action is - today most people think of the excitement of being
downtown would be not getting mugged.)

It started with the demise of the
trolley system
(Kunstler points out this was a deliberate act by GM, one of the oil
companies and a tire manufacturer, who actually were convicted of this,
and given a slap on the wrist years after it was too late.) And the
interstate highway system (and public support of highways in general
before) and the government's support of suburban development that would
eventually do in the railroads from their traditional role of carrying
everything to one of just efficient movement of bulk items. And freight
cars in turn shifted to reflect this specialized role.

So we have the peak of railroading by various measurements at
about WWI (and people who favor that era), and the "last hurrah" in the
'50's of traditional railroading,
whether you set the cut off date at 1960 or a few years later or earlier.

At least that's my thoughts on the subject.

- John Nehrich


Re: The steam era, 1960

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

John and friends,

From posts in the old FCL, and magazine articles written by some members
of this new group, I would guess that the most common era of interest is
probably the immediate post-WWII years. There are probably many
individual reasons for picking this era, but one certainly has to be the
great variety of interesting equipment and the large number of railroad
companies during those years. Perhaps the other factor is that most
modelers focus on is the time when they first became interested in
trains (sparked, no doubt, by pleasant memories and the thrill of
discovery for the first time).

My own era of modeling has been fixed at June 1957. This was chosen to
fit available locomotive and caboose models for my favorite prototype,
the Sacramento Northern (and their parent, the Western Pacific). This
gives me a chance to mix some neat newer prototypes with older equipment
that was purged shortly after that time. This does not mean I don't take
a keen interest in older rolling stock from other lines (like
wood-sheathed boxcars, for example), especially since much of it was
still seen in interchange service up to about that date. Given my
druthers, I would push the date back a few years, but that would be
getting into the time of blurry, early-childhood memories that I have a
harder time relating to. Besides, 1957 is one of the best times for
good-quality vehicle models in HO right now, and automobiles are so
important for setting a scene.

If this group cuts off at 1960 or a bit earlier, it doesn't much matter
to me.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

John W Nehrich wrote:


I think that if Mike Brock does all the work of keeping the list going,
etc., he should be left alone to pick the cutoff date and to go beyond it
at times if he thinks it relevant (sometimes a discussion of a new
technology makes you understand more about the whys and wherefores of the
older - at least that what's I've found).

(Not to get off topic, but since I'm already sending this, and
there is all this blank space below.)

At the RPI club, we struggled for years over the definition of
"steam-era". We had a working concept, but it was hard to explain to
non-modelers what the significance was, and also why we weren't that
concerned with the 1840's. It was a book by James Kunstler ("Geography Of
Nowhere") which opened our eyes to the society-wide changes that were
going on, that had impact on railroads. After all, what would the choice
of the motive power at the front end have to do with the freight cars
trailing along?

We have started using the term "Downtown Century", to represent
the 100 years or so from the Civil War to the early '60's when the
downtown of a city or even just a village was the center of life. And the
reason was that this was where the railroad interface took place (mainly
the depot, but also the freight depot). It was the rise of mass
transportation using rails (railroads AND street cars) that led to the
modern idea of the classic idea of the city. And while it goes back to
the 1860's, it took a few more decades for the institutions to catch up
(office buildings, hotels, resturants, giant theaters, department stores).

And the bottom dropped out with the shift to individual
transportion - i.e., the auto, and the decline of the downtown to the
abandoned "inner city". (We keep thinking of the 1960's pop song
"Downtown"
which extols the excitement of the area, a place to go just to be where
the action is - today most people think of the excitement of being
downtown would be not getting mugged.)

It started with the demise of the
trolley system
(Kunstler points out this was a deliberate act by GM, one of the oil
companies and a tire manufacturer, who actually were convicted of this,
and given a slap on the wrist years after it was too late.) And the
interstate highway system (and public support of highways in general
before) and the government's support of suburban development that would
eventually do in the railroads from their traditional role of carrying
everything to one of just efficient movement of bulk items. And freight
cars in turn shifted to reflect this specialized role.

So we have the peak of railroading by various measurements at
about WWI (and people who favor that era), and the "last hurrah" in the
'50's of traditional railroading,
whether you set the cut off date at 1960 or a few years later or earlier.

At least that's my thoughts on the subject.

- John Nehrich


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@egroups.com


Wire handrails

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Tony Thompson writes in the Steamloco forum:

. I too dislike intensely
the application of styrene handrails, and consistently replace them with
wire. I don't think styrene is a good material for this application.

This raises an interesting point. Tony, what substance [ glue ] do you use
to attach them [ wire handrails ]? Anyone know how P2K is attaching the ones
on the gons?

Mike


Re: Wire handrails

Richard Hendrickson
 

Tony Thompson writes in the Steamloco forum:

. I too dislike intensely
the application of styrene handrails, and consistently replace them with
wire. I don't think styrene is a good material for this application.

This raises an interesting point. Tony, what substance [ glue ] do you use
to attach them [ wire handrails ]? Anyone know how P2K is attaching the ones
on the gons?
CA works fine, in my experience.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: The steam era, 1960

Shawn Beckert
 

Guys,

Didn't Illinois Central run big steam, mikados or something,
into 1961? I seem to recall seeing a photo of a very large
IC engine in service, the caption stating it was early 1961.

Shawn Beckert

21 - 40 of 181206