Date   

Re: Masking material for painting

Dave Nelson
 

This reminds me… the other day I was in an Aaron Bros Art Supply store and I noticed a variety of low adhesive tape was available… some from 3M, some Draftsman tapes, and others labeled Artist Tape.  I suspect the later two would world quite well w/ an airbrush.

 

Dave Nelson

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Aley, Jeff A



Don,

 

               This is a very late response to your message from last month.


Re: outstanding article on freight cars

Michael Evans
 

Guys, thanks for all the kind words on my Barretts cov hop article, it is appreciated.

I am trying to find out more info on the routing of these cars, if anybody has any info.

From interchange reports I know some of them were routed from the D&H to the Rutland RR at Rutland VT, up the Rut, across the OL&C div, on to Chicago. The Bob Collins color photo shows one going south on Richmondville hll, and I have read here that some showed up on the PENN.

I am not even sure if Barretts used all the granulated slate for themselves, or if the sold them to other roofing mfg.

Thanks for any info,
Mike Evans


Re: Masking material for painting

Aley, Jeff A
 

Don,

 

               This is a very late response to your message from last month.

 

               I recently bought some Frog tape.  The folks at Home Depot told me that the reason it works well is that when it gets wet, the adhesive expands to fill the gaps under the tape.  In my case, I intend to mask a heavily-textured wall where it meets a heavily-textured ceiling – a case where paint usually will bleed under regular masking tape.

 

               Now, how would that affect our models, especially if using a water-thinned paint?  I don’t know.  I also don’t know how aggressive the adhesive is on the tape.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Don
Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 5:16 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Masking material for painting

 

 



I have got to do some model painting this week and some will require some masking work. Having seen a plethora of advertisements for the new
Frog Brand masking tape for household use I'm wondering if anyone has been brave enough yet to try it with models. Looks like it might provide a better seal against any bleeding but I do not wish to make a mess out of something if it does not release/remove easily as well.
Has anyone tried this material?

Thanks in advance and excuse my crossposting the same question to the PCL.

Cordially, Don Valentine


Re: MDT Reefer Models

devansprr
 

Roger,

Many thanks for the explanation - I'm not skilled at spotting these differences, but as soon as I read this they all jumped out at me, especially the visible end sill.

Cars are wrong paint for a WWII layout anyway, but doesn't look like a repaint would result in anything better than a 5 foot away stand-in....

Dave Evans

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, ROGER HINMAN <rhinman11@...> wrote:

If you put a correctly modeled MDT post war steel underframe car next to an Accurail rfgr, end to end, the MDT car is slightly wider and taller. When looked at from the side, these dimensional differences are not as pronounced.

The fascia board on MDT cars is taller and has a profile versus a flat surface. It is angled when applied to the end to match the ocntour of the roof. The Accurail car has a narrower flat fascia and on the end there is a full triangle shape to match the side fascia.

The MDT car has an exposed end sill with a characteristic spotting feature that the siding is full length for one boardwidth on each side of the end sill. The Accurail car has a buried end sill, only sheathing is visible on the end.

The MDT car poling pockets are placed directly on the end sill whereas on the Accurail car they are mounted below the bottom of the end sheathing.

There are additional issues with the safety appliances, uncoupling levers,striker casting.....


As you mention, many of the MDT wood cars received angle iron reinforcements on their ends, but this was not an as built condition on any car. Given the early paint scheme chosen for the referenced model, the reworked ends would not be appropriate.



On Sep 10, 2013, at 9:05 PM, "Dave Evans" <devans1@...> wrote:

Roger,

Thank-you for the clarification. I am confused about the ends - is it the interface to the frame that is wrong, or at the roof line? I am not skilled in spotting the differences.

The early MDT cars seem to lack any exterior framing, although the post-war rebuilds (even when they retained wood ends) did add some vertical structures?

Dave Evans

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, ROGER HINMAN <rhinman11@> wrote:

my comments had to do with the Accurail car used for the wood model

Roger Hinman
On Sep 10, 2013, at 7:07 PM, "Dave Evans" <devans1@> wrote:

All,

Bob asked about both the steel and wood models.

The discussion so far seems to be focused on the steel car?

Is the wood model that far off? It seems to be a pretty good match (can't see the roof) to MDT 22223 (circa 1936-7?) in Roger Hinman's MDT book on page 152. The lettering in particular seems to be a spot-on match.

Am I missing something?

Dave Evans

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


Bob, the lettering placement does not match any of the photos I've seen of the white MDT reefers.
The capacity data and the dimensional data are shifted to the left and right, respectively, on prototype
MDT reefers. But I'm no expert on MDT...

Tim O'Connor



An NMRA Division is selling HO scale MDT reefers in both wood- and steel-sheathed versions. These are painted in white with blue and red stripes:
<http://www.cincy-div7.org/projects.html>http://www.cincy-div7.org/projects.html

The cars are derived from Accurail's 4800-series 40-foot wood reefers with fishbelly steel underframes and Accurail's 8300-series 40-foot all-steel reefers.

Would anyone car to comment on the accuracy of the original models or the paint schemes on these specific models?

Thanks
Bob Chaparro
Hemet , CA


Re: brass model foam decomposition

Michael Watnoski
 

Greetings,

    I have been using Glad and Saran for years without any indication of oils leaching.  It seems unlikely that that a food qualified product would have anything harmful in it.  I will leave it to the chemists on the list to make a ruling on this.

Michael

On 9/12/2013 9:48 AM, mguill1224@... wrote:

 NO!  Do not use Saran or Glad because oil leaches out of the film onto the model.  Buy wrapping material from Reboxx that will not damage a painted model.  Also, wrap the model in tissue paper BEFORE wrapping it in the protective film.  Note that this is what importers do - they wrap their models in tissue and then in the protective film.  H.T. Guillaume



Re: brass model foam decomposition

 

 NO!  Do not use Saran or Glad because oil leaches out of the film onto the model.  Buy wrapping material from Reboxx that will not damage a painted model.  Also, wrap the model in tissue paper BEFORE wrapping it in the protective film.  Note that this is what importers do - they wrap their models in tissue and then in the protective film.  H.T. Guillaume


--- In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote:

Greetings,

To avoid the problem of sticking foam, wrap
the models in clear plastic film like Saran wrap
or Glad wrap before placing in foam.

Michael


On 9/10/2013 10:21 PM, Schuyler Larrabee wrote:
> When Reboxx got into the business of replacement boxes for brass models,
> this problem was well known. They put quite a bit of research into the
> right kind of foam to use to defer decomposition as long as possible if not
> permanently. Since JP Barger is on this list, perhaps he could share the
> generic description of the foam they used.
>
>
>
> Schuyler
>
>
>
>
> Brass models almost always have a coat of clear lacquer on them. I typically
> soak my brass models in lacquer thinner for a few days, then rinse, grit
> blast
> (to remove tiny bits stuck to grabirons etc) and wash. Blasting is good for
> removal of oxidation.
>
> Tim O'Connor
>
>
>
>
> Much depends on the type of foam and type of paint. If it is just the foam
> giving up and sticking to the paint gentle polishing with a soft cotton
> cloth dipped in alcohol may help. This may cause the paint to develop a
> whitish bloom but a recoating with clear lacquer or dullcoat should improve
> things. Brasso is useful for polishing out well cured enamels and lacquers,
> but will lead to very shiny freightcars -
>
> If the original paint is an acrylic or of the decomposing foam has reacted
> with the paint or embedded itself into the surface, then I am afraid you are
> in for a complete strip and repaint unless the affected areas are small and
> not very visible
>
> Aidrian
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Staffan Ehnbom <staffan.ehnbom@... >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> I couldn't find anything in archives on brass model foam decomposition. What
> can be done to the attack on the paint on the model?
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


PRR X-29 Box To SAL Ventilated REA Box?

Scaler164@...
 

Wondering about how similar PRR's X-29 boxes may have been to SAL's Ventilated REA boxes?  In S scale, SSA (S Scale America) offers a model of PRR's X-29 box that might be a good starting point for modeling the SAL REA Vent's if they are similar enough.
 
 
John Degnan
Scaler164@...
 


Re: PRR X-29 Conversion To SAL REA Box ???

Tony Thompson
 

John Degnan wrote:

 
... so I have to ask about the similarities between the PRR X-29 boxes and SAL's Ventilated REA boxes.  Aside from the obvious vents, how similar were these prototypes?

      John, surely you mean X29?    

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, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





PRR X-29 Conversion To SAL REA Box ???

Scaler164@...
 

As usual, I do not have my SAL books handy, so I cannot reference them...
 
... so I have to ask about the similarities between the PRR X-29 boxes and SAL's Ventilated REA boxes.  Aside from the obvious vents, how similar were these prototypes?
 
I ask this due to the availability of a PRR X-29 in S scale (from S Scale America, through DesPlaines Hobbies) that MIGHT lend itself to an easy conversion to an SAL REA car for my S scale fleet.
 
 
John Degnan
Scaler164@...
 


Re: PFE Steel reefers

Dick Harley
 

Tim O'Connor asks: 

>> Dick, what's the issue with the hatches? I'm just curious 

>> -- is it easily fixed? Can the roof be replaced with an 

>> Intermountain roof?   Would that fix it?


I don't know yet.

Come to Naperville and find out.


Cheers,

Dick Harley

Laguna Beach,  CA



--- In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote:

Dick, what's the issue with the hatches? I'm just curious -- is it
easily fixed? Can the roof be replaced with an Intermountain roof?
Would that fix it?

Tim O'Connor


> Marklin/Trix did a model of the R-40-14 that had some serious
> shortcomings - like the hatches.
> Dick Harley


Re: MDT Reefer Models

ROGER HINMAN
 

If you put a correctly modeled MDT post war steel underframe car next to an Accurail rfgr, end to end,  the MDT car is slightly wider and taller. When looked at from the side, these dimensional differences are not as pronounced.

The fascia board on MDT cars is taller and has a profile versus a flat surface. It is angled when applied to the end to match the ocntour of the roof. The Accurail car has a narrower flat fascia and on the end there is a full triangle shape to match the side fascia.

The MDT car has an exposed end sill with a characteristic spotting feature that the siding is full length for one boardwidth on each side of the end sill. The Accurail car has a buried end sill, only sheathing is visible on the end. 

The MDT car poling pockets are placed directly on the end sill whereas on the Accurail car they are mounted below the bottom of the end sheathing.

There are additional issues with the safety appliances, uncoupling levers,striker casting.....


As you mention, many of the MDT wood cars received angle iron reinforcements on their ends, but this was not an as built condition on any car. Given the early paint scheme chosen for the referenced model, the reworked ends would not be appropriate.



On Sep 10, 2013, at 9:05 PM, "Dave Evans" <devans1@...> wrote:

 

Roger,

Thank-you for the clarification. I am confused about the ends - is it the interface to the frame that is wrong, or at the roof line? I am not skilled in spotting the differences.

The early MDT cars seem to lack any exterior framing, although the post-war rebuilds (even when they retained wood ends) did add some vertical structures?

Dave Evans

--- In STMFC@..., ROGER HINMAN wrote:
>
> my comments had to do with the Accurail car used for the wood model
>
> Roger Hinman
> On Sep 10, 2013, at 7:07 PM, "Dave Evans" wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Bob asked about both the steel and wood models.
> >
> > The discussion so far seems to be focused on the steel car?
> >
> > Is the wood model that far off? It seems to be a pretty good match (can't see the roof) to MDT 22223 (circa 1936-7?) in Roger Hinman's MDT book on page 152. The lettering in particular seems to be a spot-on match.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
> >
> > Dave Evans
> >
> > --- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob, the lettering placement does not match any of the photos I've seen of the white MDT reefers.
> > > The capacity data and the dimensional data are shifted to the left and right, respectively, on prototype
> > > MDT reefers. But I'm no expert on MDT...
> > >
> > > Tim O'Connor
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >An NMRA Division is selling HO scale MDT reefers in both wood- and steel-sheathed versions. These are painted in white with blue and red stripes:
> > > ><http://www.cincy-div7.org/projects.html>http://www.cincy-div7.org/projects.html
> > > >
> > > >The cars are derived from Accurail's 4800-series 40-foot wood reefers with fishbelly steel underframes and Accurail's 8300-series 40-foot all-steel reefers.
> > > >
> > > >Would anyone car to comment on the accuracy of the original models or the paint schemes on these specific models?
> > > >
> > > >Thanks
> > > >Bob Chaparro
> > > >Hemet , CA
> > >
> >
> >
>



Re: MDT Reefer Models

Bruce Smith
 

Dave,

To clarify, what it looks like Bob is talking about is a hybrid model consisting of the body of the Accurail wood reefer and the underframe of their steel reefer.  My comments were with respect to the wood car, which as has been stated often, is a BREX prototype.  I don't think changing the underbody on this car fixes the many issues that exist for modelers such as ourselves.  So let's go with "stand in at best".


Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/


"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."

                           __

n Sep 10, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Dave Evans wrote:

All,

Bob asked about both the steel and wood models.

The discussion so far seems to be focused on the steel car?

Is the wood model that far off? It seems to be a pretty good match (can't see the roof) to MDT 22223 (circa 1936-7?) in Roger Hinman's MDT book on page 152. The lettering in particular seems to be a spot-on match.

Am I missing something?

Dave Evans

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


Bob, the lettering placement does not match any of the photos I've seen of the white MDT reefers.
The capacity data and the dimensional data are shifted to the left and right, respectively, on prototype
MDT reefers. But I'm no expert on MDT...

Tim O'Connor



An NMRA Division is selling HO scale MDT reefers in both wood- and steel-sheathed versions.  These are painted in white with blue and red stripes:
<http://www.cincy-div7.org/projects.html>http://www.cincy-div7.org/projects.html

The cars are derived from Accurail's 4800-series 40-foot wood reefers with fishbelly steel underframes and Accurail's 8300-series 40-foot all-steel reefers.

Would anyone car to comment on the accuracy of the original models or the paint schemes on these specific models?

Thanks
Bob Chaparro
Hemet , CA





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/

<*> Your email settings:
   Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/join
   (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
   STMFC-digest@...
   STMFC-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   STMFC-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
   http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/



Re: PFE Steel reefers

O Fenton Wells
 

Dick, Thanks so much for taking the time to do the spread sheet that's a big help.
Fenton Wells


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Dick Harley <dick.harley4up@...> wrote:
 

Here's some data that might affect Fenton's decision about his R-40-23 bodies.

This comes from the April 1950 ORER.  I have not created this info for 1952.
For steel cars, you don't need nearly as many R-40-14s and -20s as you do R-40-10s, R-40-23s or -25s.



PFE Class Numbers Cars 4-'50 % 4-'50
R-30/40-9 91022 - 96523 2,680 6.90%
R-30/40-9 91022 - 96523 2,376 6.10%
R-30/40-9 96524 - 98718 2,125 5.50%
7,181 18.50%
R-30-19, 21, 24 62501 - 68532 5,958 15.40%
R-40-23 5001 - 8000 2,986 7.70%
R-40-23 46703 - 48702 1,992 5.10%
4,978 12.90%
R-40-10 40001 - 44700 4,594 11.90%
R-30/40-16 73001 - 76554 3,434 8.90%
R-40-25 2001 - 5000 2,998 7.70%
R-30/40-18 60001 - 62500 2,455 6.30%
R-40-20 45701 - 46702 994 2.60%
R-40-14 44701 - 45700 988 2.60%
R-40-4 71273 - 71953 488 1.30%
R-40-4 38563 - 39062 477 1.20%
965 2.50%
W.P.  (R-30-9) 50001 - 52775 114 0.30%
W.P.  (R-30-9) 50001 - 52775 647 1.70%
W.P.  (R-30-9) 50001 - 52775 155 0.40%
916 2.40%
     
 TOP-11   TOTAL 35,461 91.60%
4-'50   PFE   TOTAL 38,721


Enjoy,
Dick Harley
Laguna Beach,  CA





--
Fenton Wells
5 Newberry Lane
Pinehurst NC 28374
910-420-1144
srrfan1401@...


Re: Piedmont & Northern Box Car Photo IN GC&L Sales Add

Eric Lombard
 

Allen, does the add have a date?
Eric


Re: PFE Steel reefers

Tim O'Connor
 

Dick, what's the issue with the hatches? I'm just curious -- is it
easily fixed? Can the roof be replaced with an Intermountain roof?
Would that fix it?

Tim O'Connor

Marklin/Trix did a model of the R-40-14 that had some serious
> shortcomings - like the hatches.
> Dick Harley


Piedmont & Northern Box Car Photo IN GC&L Sales Add

ALLEN STANLEY
 

Hi All,

 

While scaanning a bunch of old Georgia Car and Loco files I came across this add for boxcars for sale. The scan is in the files section and name starts PN or Piedmont & Northern. Notive they erased the name from the car side as well as in the logo. This was standard proceedure for them. If they had a diagram they would usually have them in the add as well.

 

Interesting car.

 

Allen Stanley

Greer, SC


Re: more 70 ton HO trucks -- this time from Rapido

Dennis Storzek
 

 



--- In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote:

Thanks for spotting that Tim… ;>)

I posted sample photos at the end of last week at -
http://www.rapidotrains.com/trucks_ho.html (scroll down).

Bill Schneider

Are the scale width?

Dennis


Re: more 70 ton HO trucks -- this time from Rapido

Bill Schneider
 

Thanks for spotting that Tim… ;>)

I posted sample photos at the end of last week at -
http://www.rapidotrains.com/trucks_ho.html (scroll down).

Bill Schneider
Rapido Trains



From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
O'Connor
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 3:41 AM
To: stmfc@yahoogroups.com; MFCL@yahoogroups.com; bbfcl@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] more 70 ton HO trucks -- this time from Rapido

 
(apologies for multiple posts if you belong to more than one group)

The drawings look great. If the models are as good I suspect the
truck with replacement roller bearings will be popular.

70 ton Barber Stabilized with solid bearings
http://www.rapidotrains.com/images/freight/70t_sb_truck.jpg

same truck with roller bearing journals
http://www.rapidotrains.com/images/freight/70t_rb_truck.jpg

70 ton Barber S-2-C roller bearing
http://www.rapidotrains.com/images/freight/70t_rb_truck2.jpg

Tim O'Connor


more 70 ton HO trucks -- this time from Rapido

Tim O'Connor
 

(apologies for multiple posts if you belong to more than one group)

The drawings look great. If the models are as good I suspect the
truck with replacement roller bearings will be popular.

70 ton Barber Stabilized with solid bearings
http://www.rapidotrains.com/images/freight/70t_sb_truck.jpg

same truck with roller bearing journals
http://www.rapidotrains.com/images/freight/70t_rb_truck.jpg

70 ton Barber S-2-C roller bearing
http://www.rapidotrains.com/images/freight/70t_rb_truck2.jpg

Tim O'Connor


Re: PFE Steel reefers

Tony Thompson
 

Dick Harley wrote:

 

Here's some data that might affect Fenton's decision about his R-40-23 bodies.

For steel cars, you don't need nearly as many R-40-14s and -20s as you do R-40-10s, R-40-23s or -25s.

      Similar data are in my RMC articles from 20-some years ago, and of course in the PFE book. They are also laid out for 1953 (my modeling year) in one of my early blog posts, where I discussed proportioning one's freight car fleet to that of the prototype. That post, with table, is at this link:


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, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history




66821 - 66840 of 185175