Date   

Re: More Missing Links

Armand Premo
 

Are we not all overlooking 40' auto box cars ?Wouldn't these cars have universal appeal?.Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Brock
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 5:50 PM
Subject: [STMFC] More Missing Links


Missing link cars is an interesting subject and excercise and over the yrs
has, I think, given us greedy modelers useful stuff. I'll add a comment or
two.

1. From the perspective of the largest number of prototype cars [ but
certainly not the most common nationwide ] for which there is no model car,
I don't think one could argue against the Alternate Standard AAR 2 bay
offset side hopper. The prototype...about 25,000 C&O cars but of several
ends, plus Erie, NKP, P&WV, NP [ NP? ], W&LE, M&STL, Clinchfield, and a few
small, obscure lines such as L&A, BAR and Santa Fe east of the
West...wherever they were to be found...presumably somewhere in
Illinois...<G>.

2. Also, not to be overlooked is the 4 bay hopper car. Armand has noted this
before.

Other than that, the only cars I can conceive of importance would be the 4
course tank cars of the UP 4209 - 4908 12500 gal cars and, of course, the UP
69000 class tank cars...both of which modelers have been clamoring for for
yrs. I suppose the UP HK 50 ton series of ballast hopper cars would also be
a good choice....unless you were to model some RR other than UP.

Actually, I agree with many that a "depressed center" flat car would be a
good choice...although if it were me, I would not do it in plastic. One
issue for such cars might be the trucks depending on the prototype. Anyhow,
I've been preaching about such cars for 10 yrs.

Mike Brock






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



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.422 / Virus Database: 270.14.27/2452 - Release Date: 10/22/09 18:44:00


Re: Missing links

Greg Martin
 

Guys,


A possible candidate for consideration is the post-war rebuilt boxcars that came from the RR's rebuilding with an ARR box on a earlier underframes. Certainly we know that the ATSF, KCS,PRR, WABASH and the ACL did this and I am sure others are well. It would require tooling for a variety of underframes, roofs and ends, but the "box" remained the same. (yes, I realize the ACL cars were only 10'-3" IH, but my eyes can't measure 3 scale inches without a micrometer). Once the tooling was complete the idea would be to mix and match the possible ends, roofs and underframes to cover as many roads as one could. The PRR had two classes as well as the ACL and I am not an ATSF expert, but I believe there was more than one. The Wabash and the DT&I had cars that mirrored the PRR X26c as well. The PRR continued the practice well into the 1950s like the ACL, being frugal was the name of the game at the time. If you include double door cars the list grows. The trucks were recycled (the re-use of Andrews trucks by some) as well. It would take research and forethought before one jumped in, but it does open many doors for sales to prototype modelers.

Greg Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: Armand Premo <armprem2@surfglobal.net>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, Oct 22, 2009 11:03 am
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Missing links






Gang,I kind of suspected that there would be a regional influence for nominees.While offset hoppers seem to dominate the interest of eastern aficionados ,there are still many other types of hoppers that are totally missing from the scene.I will attempt to collate the choices and put it to a vote.While hoppers seem to be of only marginal interest to western prototype modelers some other cars appear to have a more uniform appeal.Armand Premo





.


Re: More Missing Links

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Mike Brock wrote:
Actually, I agree with many that a "depressed center" flat car would be a good choice...although if it were me, I would not do it in plastic. One issue for such cars might be the trucks depending on the prototype. Anyhow, I've been preaching about such cars for 10 yrs.
By the 1950s, most such cars (of 125 tons capacity, a common figure) used conventional 6-wheel Buckeye trucks.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


More Missing Links

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Missing link cars is an interesting subject and excercise and over the yrs has, I think, given us greedy modelers useful stuff. I'll add a comment or two.

1. From the perspective of the largest number of prototype cars [ but certainly not the most common nationwide ] for which there is no model car, I don't think one could argue against the Alternate Standard AAR 2 bay offset side hopper. The prototype...about 25,000 C&O cars but of several ends, plus Erie, NKP, P&WV, NP [ NP? ], W&LE, M&STL, Clinchfield, and a few small, obscure lines such as L&A, BAR and Santa Fe east of the West...wherever they were to be found...presumably somewhere in Illinois...<G>.

2. Also, not to be overlooked is the 4 bay hopper car. Armand has noted this before.

Other than that, the only cars I can conceive of importance would be the 4 course tank cars of the UP 4209 - 4908 12500 gal cars and, of course, the UP 69000 class tank cars...both of which modelers have been clamoring for for yrs. I suppose the UP HK 50 ton series of ballast hopper cars would also be a good choice....unless you were to model some RR other than UP.

Actually, I agree with many that a "depressed center" flat car would be a good choice...although if it were me, I would not do it in plastic. One issue for such cars might be the trucks depending on the prototype. Anyhow, I've been preaching about such cars for 10 yrs.

Mike Brock


Re: Missing links

SUVCWORR@...
 

Armand,

I would suggest including the NYC USRA clones,

Rich Orr

-----Original Message-----
From: Armand Premo <armprem2@surfglobal.net>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, Oct 22, 2009 1:03 pm
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Missing links










Gang,I kind of suspected that there would be a regional influence for
nominees.While offset hoppers seem to dominate the interest of eastern
aficionados ,there are still many other types of hoppers that are totally
missing from the scene.I will attempt to collate the choices and put it to a
vote.While hoppers seem to be of only marginal interest to western prototype
modelers some other cars appear to have a more uniform appeal.Armand Premo

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Missing links


Tony, a big ditto here!

I dearly would like to have several prewar SP flat cars. Good
examples would be something like the F-50-9 and F-50-13 which
were very distinct from each other and both classes lasted past
1960. SP used to run long cuts of empty flat cars back to Oregon.
I've seen it in photos and even in Hollywood movies!

Tim O'Connor

>3. I make it no. 3 only out of humility: the Harriman flat car with
>straight side sills, either the 40-foot or 50-foot version (if we had
>forties, we could kitbash the fifty-footers).
>
>Tony Thompson






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



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.422 / Virus Database: 270.14.20/2444 - Release Date: 10/18/09
09:04:00






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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Decal artwork (Was: Athearn Blue Box kit usefulness)

proto48er
 

Charlie -

You just HAVE to use the appropriate steam era drawing methods and equipment to draw steam era freight cars properly!

A.T.

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Morrill" <badlands@...> wrote:

Ahhh A.T.! You really do need to stop trying to put a saddle on that dead
horse. As another O.F. who had to give up my slide rule and ink pens for
the pc, I soon found CAD to be much faster because of the much greater
accuracy (how about drawing your tank cars 1:1 ) and the speed of making
changes --- no ink erasers needed!! Now ink is something to use for
staining wood flat car decks (to get back to list subject) and ties.
Charlie


Re: Missing links

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Garth Groff wrote:
I don't think so, at least not easily. It would involve cutting out alternate boards across the end, less the end braces. You would probably spend less effort building Al's kit. [Which reminds me, I've got to put mine together someday. :-[ ]

Are there other differences between the SP S-40-5 and the S-40-8? The WP cars were a supposed to be a clone of the latter class.
Extremely similar cars except for the narrow slots between boards on the ends. These are NOT alternate boards, but look like kind of quarter-board widths. I would just cut some slots, but as you say, with the bracing it's not an easy job. An approximation could be made by wide grooves which you fill with black.
Don't know about WP trucks, but on the SP cars, the S-40-5 had Vulcan trucks, the S-40-8 T-section trucks. Thats' the other distinctive feature, along with the ends.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Missing links

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Tony,

I don't think so, at least not easily. It would involve cutting out alternate boards across the end, less the end braces. You would probably spend less effort building Al's kit. [Which reminds me, I've got to put mine together someday. :-[ ]

Are there other differences between the SP S-40-5 and the S-40-8? The WP cars were a supposed to be a clone of the latter class.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Anthony Thompson wrote:

Garth Groff wrote:

You mention the SP/WP stock cars, and I gather that you are speaking of the styrene Red Caboose models and not Westerfield's resin kits. In point of fact, there is NO WP stock car from RC. The ends are solid wood, and the WP cars had open slatted upper ends. I have passed on the RC car for just that reason (also because of the absurd price). The car is an SP S-40-5 and nothing else.
Garth, is the model fixable for WP? open up some slots, etc.? I haven't looked at it with that in mind.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history



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

Yahoo! Groups Links




Re: Missing links

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Garth Groff wrote:
You mention the SP/WP stock cars, and I gather that you are speaking of the styrene Red Caboose models and not Westerfield's resin kits. In point of fact, there is NO WP stock car from RC. The ends are solid wood, and the WP cars had open slatted upper ends. I have passed on the RC car for just that reason (also because of the absurd price). The car is an SP S-40-5 and nothing else.
Garth, is the model fixable for WP? open up some slots, etc.? I haven't looked at it with that in mind.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Decal artwork (Was: Athearn Blue Box kit usefulness)

Charles Morrill
 

Ahhh A.T.! You really do need to stop trying to put a saddle on that dead horse. As another O.F. who had to give up my slide rule and ink pens for the pc, I soon found CAD to be much faster because of the much greater accuracy (how about drawing your tank cars 1:1 ) and the speed of making changes --- no ink erasers needed!! Now ink is something to use for staining wood flat car decks (to get back to list subject) and ties.
Charlie

----- Original Message -----
From: "proto48er" <atkott@swbell.net>

Schuyler -

I am also in that O.F. category! I still occasionally use a slide rule!

My last set of scale drawings (for the Yoder AC&F Type 7 tank cars - 6 different cars) were done 33.33% larger than 1/4" scale in ink on drafting paper. My intent was to have them shot down with a stat camera so that I would have a true 1/4" scale 8" X 10" negative for each sheet. However, all of the local drafting supply places have now disposed of their stat cameras, and the closest one was in a smaller town 70 miles away. (We are the 9th largest U.S. city.) Times they are a changin' - for the worse! I did use Rapidograph pens of varying width, but also used a compass from an old drafting set to make the circular cross sections. It has the split points that can be adjusted for varying line widths, loaded in the old fashion way with ink from a bottle. The good old days!

When drawing freight car scale plans, I can produce finished drawings with a Rapidograph pen much faster than someone using CAD. CAD, however, is superior for drawing things with symmetrical curvilinear form, like trucks - just no soul to the finished drawing!

A.T. Kott


Re: Missing links

Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Dave,

You mention the SP/WP stock cars, and I gather that you are speaking of the styrene Red Caboose models and not Westerfield's resin kits. In point of fact, there is NO WP stock car from RC. The ends are solid wood, and the WP cars had open slatted upper ends. I have passed on the RC car for just that reason (also because of the absurd price). The car is an SP S-40-5 and nothing else.

Kind regards,


Garth Groff

ealabhan0 wrote:

. . . the ATSF and SP/WP stock cars, you echo my point about manufacturers issuing unique one-(or two-)road plain paint cars . . . .


Regards,
Dave Sieber
Reno NV


Re: Missing links

Armand Premo
 

Gang,I kind of suspected that there would be a regional influence for nominees.While offset hoppers seem to dominate the interest of eastern aficionados ,there are still many other types of hoppers that are totally missing from the scene.I will attempt to collate the choices and put it to a vote.While hoppers seem to be of only marginal interest to western prototype modelers some other cars appear to have a more uniform appeal.Armand Premo

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Missing links


Tony, a big ditto here!

I dearly would like to have several prewar SP flat cars. Good
examples would be something like the F-50-9 and F-50-13 which
were very distinct from each other and both classes lasted past
1960. SP used to run long cuts of empty flat cars back to Oregon.
I've seen it in photos and even in Hollywood movies!

Tim O'Connor

>3. I make it no. 3 only out of humility: the Harriman flat car with
>straight side sills, either the 40-foot or 50-foot version (if we had
>forties, we could kitbash the fifty-footers).
>
>Tony Thompson






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



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.422 / Virus Database: 270.14.20/2444 - Release Date: 10/18/09 09:04:00


Re: Missing Links

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Bill Welch wrote:
InterMountain do the Insulated Tank for their ACF Type 27 Underframe.

Someone offer photo-etched dome platforms for the ACF Type 27 8K and decals for the cars with these platforms.
This is an outstanding suggestion and there have been rumors in the past that IM was considering this. I really don't know why they haven't done it, since it would get them into some colorful paint schemes, always popular with the average modeler. And the rest of us could REALLY use a good styrene ICC 104.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Box Car

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Denis Blake wrote:
Can we soon expect Signature Press do to a book on WM Fireballs and their various applications with regard to freight cars?
Only if someone writes it . . . like most of our books. There's already a fine series underway by the WM Historical Society on WM freight cars, but we would certainly be pleased to consider a WM manuscript.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Missing links

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Chuck Peck wrote:
Yes, Tony, a hopper car. A basic offset side two bay hopper with optional ends . . .
Actually, I do know. It just won't impact MY modeling if it's produced. But I would never speak against the introduction of such a model.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Missing links

David Sieber
 

Tim,

Yeah, I know; UTL X-3s have been on "most wanted" lists at least since the "Model Railroading" survey/lists of the '80s - and they're still needed. The underframe could also be used for X-4 insulated and X-5 pressurized tanks. Some X-5s had lessor markings (e.g., Skelgas); not sure if any X-4s had lessor paint. These cars surely were seen on just about every railroad and would fit anywhere.

With the ATSF and SP/WP stock cars, you echo my point about manufacturers issuing unique one-(or two-)road plain paint cars. How about the ATSF Caswell gon, PRR K7 stock car, Central Valley NP stock car, or many Bowser Pennsy cars, some only in PRR and predecessor and subsidiary lettering? We could even go back to Athearn blue box UP stock car and UP grainloading boxes (sorta'), plus classic ATSF and SP cabeese - though also in many bogus paint schemes. Someone really should do the ubiquitous UTL X-3 and other common tank cars.

The "one boring paint scheme" excuse can't explain why no styrene GATC type 30 tank cars. The old Athearn blue box 12,500gal (almost-)UP/SP tank car and modified unreal 3-dome cars (and AHM, etc., copies) were a poor attempt to continue the yellow box GATC tanks in different sizes that were excellent early '50s metal kits. While those metal underframes had no bolster-end poling pocket detail, they did exhibit most characteristics of the GATC tank car frame.

It can be frustrating trying to assemble resin tank car kits that are often at best fiddley and/or don't quite fit together; see the recent STMFC GATX 30 underframe thread. That's why I continue the call for UTLX and GATC tank cars in styrene, in the hope that others will add to the hue and cry until some manufacturer hears the potential sales market. After all, 10 years ago, who would have expected that two firms would issue the ACF type 21 and the type 27, both in 8K and 10K capacities, one even also with the insulated tank?.
I can deal better with model shortcomings than with the complete lack of a common prototype car.

Regards,
Dave Sieber
Reno NV

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


4. UTL X-3 (etc.) tank cars
Dave Sieber
Reno NV
Dave that tank car has been on the wish list for so long
I think we've all just given up on it... The usual reason
given is that it had only one owner and a boring paint
scheme. But then Intermountain did a Santa Fe stock car,
and Red Caboose did an SP stock car, and so on -- surely
the X-3 travelled on MOST class 1 railroads did it not?

Tim O'Connor


Re: Decal artwork (Was: Athearn Blue Box kit usefulness)

proto48er
 

Schuyler -

I am also in that O.F. category! I still occasionally use a slide rule!

My last set of scale drawings (for the Yoder AC&F Type 7 tank cars - 6 different cars) were done 33.33% larger than 1/4" scale in ink on drafting paper. My intent was to have them shot down with a stat camera so that I would have a true 1/4" scale 8" X 10" negative for each sheet. However, all of the local drafting supply places have now disposed of their stat cameras, and the closest one was in a smaller town 70 miles away. (We are the 9th largest U.S. city.) Times they are a changin' - for the worse! I did use Rapidograph pens of varying width, but also used a compass from an old drafting set to make the circular cross sections. It has the split points that can be adjusted for varying line widths, loaded in the old fashion way with ink from a bottle. The good old days!

When drawing freight car scale plans, I can produce finished drawings with a Rapidograph pen much faster than someone using CAD. CAD, however, is superior for drawing things with symmetrical curvilinear form, like trucks - just no soul to the finished drawing!

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Schuyler Larrabee" <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

I didn't think I qualified as an old F__t, but apparently so. I did the lettering for a custom run
of reefers for the ELHS using ink on mylar. All I had was oblique photos, and an accurate model
(for once). It was all mathematical proportion work, but it came out perfectly. The most
disturbing thing was, since I was doing this mostly far after midnight, when I inadvertently did the
calculations for the second N in LACKAWANNA in spite of having just done them for the >>first<< N,
and they didn't come out the same. Now, I was VERY tired, but I was being VERY careful with this
work, and wondered about that. The next night, when I was a tad more alert, I looked VERY carefully
at the photos, and was able to establish to my satisfaction that the stencil that the manufacturer,
PC&F, cut had Ns of different width. Not by much, about a quarter or 3/8", but that is a .004-005"
difference on the model. When the builder built a second series of cars a few years later, they
used the same stencil, with the same mismatched Ns.

These were the EL's 5000 series orange mechanical reefers bought for exclusive service shipping Cool
Whip. And that is out of this list's era.

SGL

Tony,

I will gladly accept the "old f__ts" title with honor. Sure beats the
alternative.


Re: Ambroid Vinegar Car Plans

CJ Riley
 

A good source for kit instructions is the NMRA Kalmbach Library. They maintain a large collection of instruction sheets.

CJ Riley

--- On Wed, 10/21/09, rdietrichson <Rdietrichson@ec.rr.com> wrote:

From: rdietrichson <Rdietrichson@ec.rr.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Ambroid Vinegar Car Plans
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 4:15 AM






 





Good morning all,

Does anyone out there have the plan sheet for the Ambroid vinegar car that could send it to me. I recently acquired the kit, but alas there is no plan sheet.

Thank you,

Rick Dietrichson

Wilmington, NC

Rdietrichson@ ec.rr.com































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


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Box Car

seaboard_1966
 

Can we soon expect Signature Press do to a book on WM Fireballs and their various applications with regard to freight cars?


Denis Blake
North Hamlet Shop, OH

----- Original Message -----
From: "cj riley" <cjriley42@yahoo.com>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 12:38 PM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Box Car




--- On Wed, 10/21/09, Aley, Jeff A <Jeff.A.Aley@intel.com> wrote:

From: Aley, Jeff A <Jeff.A.Aley@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Box Car
To: "STMFC@yahoogroups.com" <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 3:08 PM












Somebody please telephone Tony Thompson and tell him that his email has been hijacked by a WM fan.



Regards,



-Jeff

I happen to know first hand that AWT has been on many enthusiastic railfan trips on the WM while it was still operating just as I, an admitted Fireball Fanatic has railfanned the SP.
CJ Riley

























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

Yahoo! Groups Links





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



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.26/2451 - Release Date: 10/22/09 08:51:00


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Box Car

CJ Riley
 

--- On Wed, 10/21/09, Aley, Jeff A <Jeff.A.Aley@intel.com> wrote:

From: Aley, Jeff A <Jeff.A.Aley@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Box Car
To: "STMFC@yahoogroups.com" <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 3:08 PM






 





Somebody please telephone Tony Thompson and tell him that his email has been hijacked by a WM fan.



Regards,



-Jeff

I happen to know first hand that AWT has been on many enthusiastic railfan trips on the WM while it was still operating just as I, an admitted Fireball Fanatic has railfanned the SP.
CJ Riley





















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

95261 - 95280 of 180946