Date   

Wabash Panel Side Hopper

losgatos48@...
 

I have a photo of a Wabash twin hopper with panel sides. The car number is 34279. Can someone tell me a little bit about these cars? Are they rebuilt USRA twins or a similar design?

Thanks,
Gene Deimling


Re: Feed Mills

Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, water.kresse@... wrote:

I assummed that the 1937 era 70-ton covered hops were targeted for
denser materials such as gypsum for making cement. The gypsum
staining is why the C&O eventually changed over to gray from black
covered hops.

Al Kresse
There were some few 70 ton covered hoppers built for grain service in
the very late fifties; the Soo line had some. Typical 70T cement cars
had cubic capacities of 1958 or 2003 CU. FT. In 1958 the Soo bought
some Pullman Standard "Jumbo" (yep, jumbo, said so right on the car)
three bay covered hoppers with a capacity of 70T and 2893 Cu.Ft. The
next year they went for more, these being "Super Jumbo" cars with a
capacity of 70T and 3219 Cu.Ft.

The use of covered hoppers for grain must not have been a foregone
conclusion at that time, because the railroad also began a program of
building new 50' boxcars with 10' plug doors that had grain loading
doors in the upper portion of the door. This arrangement overcame the
problem of fitting grain doors to wide door openings; the main plug
door became the "grain door", while the grain was blown in through the
small upper door. These cars were also 70t capy., and over 5000
cu.ft., so they would never fill above the bottom of the loading
doors. The cars with grain loading doors were built in 1963 and '64,
so are beyond the scope of this list, but it's interesting to note
that when the first 100T covered hoppers arrived, no additional
boxcars were built with grain loading doors, and those that had them
eventually lost them over the years.

It would appear that on the Soo at least, 1964 - 1965 was when the
decision was made to go with 100T covered hoppers exclusively for
grain service. Small customers who couldn't deal with the larger cars
were serviced for maybe the next decade or so with the existing 40'
boxcar fleet.

Dennis


Re: Feed Mills

water.kresse@...
 

I assummed that the 1937 era 70-ton covered hops were targeted for denser materials such as gypsum for making cement. The gypsum staining is why the C&O eventually changed over to gray from black covered hops.

Al Kresse

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Donald B. Valentine" <riverman_vt@yahoo.com>
Speaking of feed mills in responding to James McDonald's question
brings up another point surrounding them. Prior to the elimination of
the PIT (Process In Transit) rating, and certainly in our steam era,
feed mills in northern New England seemed to receive the bulk of
their grains via Canadian Differential Tariff routings. Much of this
was, probably for that reason, grain bulk loaded into Canadian cars
with Signode or other grain doors, these having beed discussed before
on this list. I'm not just certain of when the changeover from box
cars to covered hoppers occurred for this inbound grain, however, and
wonder if someone can shed some light on that issue. Was grain ever
loaded into covered hoppers such as the ACF 70 Ton car type, for
example? If so, I don't recall seeing any in such use. My first
recollection of grain arriving at feed mills in covered hoppers is of
it coming in PS-2's and that is rapidly getting out of the steam era
in New England.

The other issue here is grain arriving in Canadian cars. It occurs
to me that they could not be reloaded for delivery of the processed
product, i.e. grain in 100 lb. bags, to the final destination. Is
this correct? If so that would require a lot of extra switching at a
good sized feed mill to remove the empty Canadian cars and replace
them with American cars, with a preference for home road cars, for
the final delivery. While a lot of feed mills have disappeared in
this part of the world over the last twenty five years there are
still some large ones left. The H.K. Webster (Blue Seal Feeds) plant
in Richford, VT, for example, is within a stone's throw of the
International Boundary (literally) and seems to have been, and
remain, about the largest such plant in New England. While most of
the processed feed now leaves in tractor trailers I can well recall
the day when finding 25 to 30 cars sitting at that one plant was
nothing. The CPR kept an RS-2 at Richford almost solely to handle the
switching at that plant. Thus this is an industry that could provide
a lot of action on a model railroad. But I'm wondering about the car
mix for the postwar period as I really don't recall any early covered
hopper types.

Food for thought with one's layout planning.

Don Valentine


Al Westerfield's new R7 reefer version with Hutchins roof

lnbill <bwelch@...>
 

I received my order yesterday from Al of this new version of the ex-
PRR R7 that were all eventually sold to Fruit Growers Express. I am
already building the previous release, one of each of the early
roofs.

One significant change to this release in addition to the Hutchins
roof. Al includes the parts to modify the ends of wood bulge plates
just above the sill. On the cars built by the Pennsy, these
structures had another bracket casting indentical to the others,
while the cars built by the commercial builders had a different kind
of bracket at the end of this bulge beam. The PRR built cars also
had a six rung side ladder and no drop grab under the ladder. I
spent the morning modifying one of the cars already underway with
end beam parts pirated from one of the new kits. There is some
slight surgery required to cut into the body casting on each end. It
looks really good with the new parts applied.

Regarding the Hutchins roof, I have a Wil Whittaker photo of FGEX
43509 reweighed at Hillyard Washington on 9-45 with the Hutchins
roof applied. (Still equiped w/KD brakes too.) Modelers need to
remove the small rib cast into each roof panel as panels used by FGE
did not have these. I removed them from three roofs last night while
watching a DVR recording of "Sand Hogs." Sanding each panel with 600
grit sandpaper and then 1000 grit goes quickly.

Practicially no two of these cars were the same with different sill
steps on some, different lengths of the second grab on the left end
of the car, or no second grab, two different trucks, etc, so they
are fun to build with different details. The sill step from Terry
Wegmans PFE kit are perfect for many of these cars.

Best to work from photos. Enjoy!

Bill


Corn Starch

Bob McCarthy
 

Howdy!
 
     In the early 1950's the Lancaster and Chester Railway bought 10 PS2 type covered hoppers to move corn starch to their weaving mills in the upstate of South Carolina.  It is used to help in preparing cotton for weaving.
 
     These cars would be a unique addition to late steam trains.  I will post the color scheme when I get the correct division line between the Carolina Blue and Grey of the carbody.
HERALD KING (yes, they are back in business with a new owner) makes decals in HO for various L&C freight cars.  Microscale makes other decals for the L&C.  While it looks in HERALD KING catalogues that they only have boxcar and caboose, most of the lettering can be used on other cars since they used the stencil on everything.  The only items you will need are white data information from another decal set. Once I have worked it all out I will post the needed numbers on this site.
 
     The L&C RR and I are working to produce 3 or 4 RMC articles on this fascinating 108 year old shortline in the upstate of SC.  It has been profitable since 1896 and has recently doubled its track length to 60 miles!!:>) 
 
      You might say you could build a layout of the entire railroad, because they already have done it in the upstars of their HQ.  It covers every mile of the railroad and every industry they serve.
 
     By the way they have passenger cars for lease or sale.  Quite an operation started as a 3 foot guage in the 1870's and changed to standard in 1902.

--- On Wed, 12/17/08, Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@yahoo.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Feed Mills
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2008, 12:01 PM






Speaking of feed mills in responding to James McDonald's question
brings up another point surrounding them. Prior to the elimination of
the PIT (Process In Transit) rating, and certainly in our steam era,
feed mills in northern New England seemed to receive the bulk of
their grains via Canadian Differential Tariff routings. Much of this
was, probably for that reason, grain bulk loaded into Canadian cars
with Signode or other grain doors, these having beed discussed before
on this list. I'm not just certain of when the changeover from box
cars to covered hoppers occurred for this inbound grain, however, and
wonder if someone can shed some light on that issue. Was grain ever
loaded into covered hoppers such as the ACF 70 Ton car type, for
example? If so, I don't recall seeing any in such use. My first
recollection of grain arriving at feed mills in covered hoppers is of
it coming in PS-2's and that is rapidly getting out of the steam era
in New England.

The other issue here is grain arriving in Canadian cars. It occurs
to me that they could not be reloaded for delivery of the processed
product, i.e. grain in 100 lb. bags, to the final destination. Is
this correct? If so that would require a lot of extra switching at a
good sized feed mill to remove the empty Canadian cars and replace
them with American cars, with a preference for home road cars, for
the final delivery. While a lot of feed mills have disappeared in
this part of the world over the last twenty five years there are
still some large ones left. The H.K. Webster (Blue Seal Feeds) plant
in Richford, VT, for example, is within a stone's throw of the
International Boundary (literally) and seems to have been, and
remain, about the largest such plant in New England. While most of
the processed feed now leaves in tractor trailers I can well recall
the day when finding 25 to 30 cars sitting at that one plant was
nothing. The CPR kept an RS-2 at Richford almost solely to handle the
switching at that plant. Thus this is an industry that could provide
a lot of action on a model railroad. But I'm wondering about the car
mix for the postwar period as I really don't recall any early covered
hopper types.

Food for thought with one's layout planning.

Don Valentine


















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


Re: Resin Casting

Earl T. Hackett <hacketet@...>
 

I hope you guys enjoy the casting process as much as I do. It's
really neat to open a mold after a couple of hours and pull out a part
that could have otherwise could have taken weeks to build.

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Allen Cain" <allencain@...> wrote:

Earl,



THANK YOU for putting together the article. It was very well done
and I
learned a lot.



Allen Cain



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


Re: Resin Casting

mwbpequod
 

Nice article, Earl! I've been casting parts and "stuff" for a couple
of years myself and I find that everyone has a few "tricks" to share...

One question - Is that a Sargent-Welch 1402 vac pump you're using and
do you really need that much of a pump? I've 8 of them in my labs and
properly plumbed up they can draw a very serious vacuum...

Martin Brechbiel


OK, there it is. I just uploaded a pdf file to the files section
that
gives a pretty good description of how I go about making cast resin
parts. It has a really catchy name "Resin Casting." I hope some
folks will find it useful.


Feed Mills

Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
 

Speaking of feed mills in responding to James McDonald's question
brings up another point surrounding them. Prior to the elimination of
the PIT (Process In Transit) rating, and certainly in our steam era,
feed mills in northern New England seemed to receive the bulk of
their grains via Canadian Differential Tariff routings. Much of this
was, probably for that reason, grain bulk loaded into Canadian cars
with Signode or other grain doors, these having beed discussed before
on this list. I'm not just certain of when the changeover from box
cars to covered hoppers occurred for this inbound grain, however, and
wonder if someone can shed some light on that issue. Was grain ever
loaded into covered hoppers such as the ACF 70 Ton car type, for
example? If so, I don't recall seeing any in such use. My first
recollection of grain arriving at feed mills in covered hoppers is of
it coming in PS-2's and that is rapidly getting out of the steam era
in New England.

The other issue here is grain arriving in Canadian cars. It occurs
to me that they could not be reloaded for delivery of the processed
product, i.e. grain in 100 lb. bags, to the final destination. Is
this correct? If so that would require a lot of extra switching at a
good sized feed mill to remove the empty Canadian cars and replace
them with American cars, with a preference for home road cars, for
the final delivery. While a lot of feed mills have disappeared in
this part of the world over the last twenty five years there are
still some large ones left. The H.K. Webster (Blue Seal Feeds) plant
in Richford, VT, for example, is within a stone's throw of the
International Boundary (literally) and seems to have been, and
remain, about the largest such plant in New England. While most of
the processed feed now leaves in tractor trailers I can well recall
the day when finding 25 to 30 cars sitting at that one plant was
nothing. The CPR kept an RS-2 at Richford almost solely to handle the
switching at that plant. Thus this is an industry that could provide
a lot of action on a model railroad. But I'm wondering about the car
mix for the postwar period as I really don't recall any early covered
hopper types.

Food for thought with one's layout planning.

Don Valentine


Re: CSOX 5394 question

Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
 

Were it not for the car type, apparently, molasses would be a
viable option for what CSOX 5394 was carrying as a lolt of it was
used in feed mills for pelletized feed and even more for the so-
called "sweet" feeds. The pellets are formed by a process of steaming
the ingredients and and pushing them through a small diameter orofice
from which the final product comes out like a string of spagetti and
is then broken up. I'm not quite sure how the "sweet" feed is mixed
but it is still heated in process and the molasses acts as a binder
to hold all ingredients together. Prodcing all this heat and steam
obviously takes more fuel than what it takes to merely heat the mill
in colder weather. Thus I strongly suspect that the CSOX tank car was
carrying exactly what one would first suspect an oil company's tank
car to be carrying. While feed mills in some parts of the nation no
doubt can use gas (LPG, LNG or even gas piped in) as a cheaper source
of fuel, I have yet to see such a feed mill in New England or the
northeast in general.

Take care, Don Valentine

Take care





--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, James McDonald <james@...> wrote:

Hello all,

Can anyone give me details on tank car CSOX 5394? My resources at
hand, as well as the archives of this list, have been consulted and
I'm coming up short.

The background: in another group I read in, which does not concern
itself primarily with freight cars, a question was raised about
what
tank cars would be doing at a feed mill in the late 1940's and
early
1950's. There are a number of photos of different tank cars parked
at
a feed mill in Bel Air, MD on the M&P. One such car was Cities
Service CSOX 5394.

I'm hoping that by determining what that car's characteristics are,
we can narrow down on the commodity somewhat.

Thanks in advance,

James McDonald
Greenbelt, MD


Re: HOMGAS tank cars

feddersenmark
 

Peter, If you can find a copy of an October 1985 Mainline Modeler,
therein is an article I wrote on how to make several of the
modifications to the Athearn tank car and the Tichy AC&F tank car
underframe you need. While it is not the same car, it should help
with the major modifications. Mark Feddersen







--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Ness" <prness@...> wrote:

Hi Richard,

Thanks for the explanation re: modeling an earlier ACF type tank
car. Based on my limited capabilities (currently I can handle a
limited scope of "rectangular" cars like some boxes, reefers and
flats) I think I will avoid "round" cars (tanks) for a while longer
and embrace your earlier advice on this topic:

"I guess the conclusion to be drawn from this is that if you're
going
to model one of these cars, one is certainly enough, and it should
be
either HGCX 214 or 978."

<VBG>
Peter


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@>
wrote:
By that time you're looking at a fairly involved kitbash, which you
would then have to paint and letter yourself.


Re: 2008 Naperville Mini-Kit...

Jack Burgess
 

That didn't take long...Denis was the first to ask for it and also promised
to use it.

Jack Burgess
www.yosemitevalleyrr.com


2008 Naperville Mini-Kit...

Jack Burgess
 

Attendees at Naperville this year received a Mini-Kit for converting a Red
Caboose box car to a GM&O 1940/1942 ACF box car. The kit includes decals, a
jig to build the unique ladders, and instructions. As I model 1939, I can't
use the kit. If someone else can use it, I'll mail it to the first person
who responds (and promises to use it) for a $1 to cover costs. E-mail me
OFF-LINE at jack@yosemitevalleyrr.com

Jack Burgess
www.yosemitevalleyrr.com


Re: Resin Casting

Allen Cain <allencain@...>
 

Earl,



THANK YOU for putting together the article. It was very well done and I
learned a lot.



Allen Cain


Re: HOMGAS tank cars

Peter Ness
 

Hi Richard,

Thanks for the explanation re: modeling an earlier ACF type tank
car. Based on my limited capabilities (currently I can handle a
limited scope of "rectangular" cars like some boxes, reefers and
flats) I think I will avoid "round" cars (tanks) for a while longer
and embrace your earlier advice on this topic:

"I guess the conclusion to be drawn from this is that if you're going
to model one of these cars, one is certainly enough, and it should be
either HGCX 214 or 978."

<VBG>
Peter


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
wrote:
By that time you're looking at a fairly involved kitbash, which you
would then have to paint and letter yourself.


Re: Resin Casting

Mark
 

Thank You for posting this. I plan on casting flat boxcar ends but your article takes casting to the next Level.

Sincerely, Mark Morgan




































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


Re: Rubber brake air hoses: a disappointment.

Paul Lyons
 

Denny and Group,

Denny I was really surprised by your negative comments regarding the HiTech air hoses. Surprised, because after completing a half dozen models, I absolutely love these new HiTech rubber air hoses. I think they are far superior to anything we have had to date. Yes there are a few short comings. I did not realize that they are a bit long until I read your email. So now I am going to have to go back and carefully look at some completed models to see if .050" really makes a visual difference. I?seriously question that it?will make the difference you describe in your email. On the other hand, I agree,?a real short fall is that they cannot be curved to the prototype shape. A bit unforunate, but certainly off set by the pluses.

I am mounting these hoses to the PSC bracket on most models. They look dynamite! The two big pluses of rubber air hoses?are they do not break if "hit" and they do not foul the coupler if the bracket is not set the "perfect" distance from the end and coupler box. The rubber these things are made out of is so flexable, that if the air hose is in a?SLIGHT conflict with the coupler, the coupler will just "push" it out of the way. You have to see it to believe it.

I plan on bringing a couple of models with these hoses and brackets to Cocco Beach next month.

Paul Lyons
Laguna Niguel, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Denny Anspach <danspach@macnexus.org>
To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:29 am
Subject: [STMFC] Rubber brake air hoses: a disappointment.






Continuing a mild obsession of both creating much more accurate
prototypical detailing for the ends of our steam era freight cars, AND
retaining good reliable handling and operating characteristics while
doing so, I have continued my quest for the ideal air brake hose/
mounting that both looks good AND stands up to more than a few moments
of routine handling. The combination of both shape-able accurate
brass air hoses, and related angle cock brackets have seemed so far to
offer the best combination of both. However, despite absolutely
beautiful modeling accuracy, and the very good anchoring offered by
the new angle cock brackets, the projecting brass air hose still
offers a stiff prominent lever arm to snag the unwary, causing the
hose to fracture at its very thinnest and fine points: the hose
connection to the angle cock, or at the thin pipe between the angle
cock and the supporting U bolt bracket. The brass hoses are certainly
more hardy than the plastic hoses (and the plastic hoses are not
easily shape-able), but they are not perfect. Rubber hoses would seem
to be almost ideal, if they could be made with sufficient accurate
detailing, and were shape-able.

Along comes the rubber hoses produced by HiTech Details. I admit I was
dubious that such fine hoses could be produced out of rubber- but they
do indeed appear to be fine, finely detailed, and with minimal effort
mountable in the new PSC angle cock brackets . However, expectations
were dashed when I noted a killer: the rubber brake hoses are the
27" length adopted by the AAR as standard sometime after 1957, NOT the
significantly shorter 22" length common to virtually every single one
of our steam era cars (my 1957 Car Builders Cyc shows 22", while my
1966 shows 27"). Mounting these hoses in proper locations on our cars
will cause them to drag along between the rails, and in my opinion,
also look terrible in the process.

Other downsides: a mounting lug allows the hoses to be mechanically
attached to the car bottom, but the lug is vertical, not angled to the
center as they should be. Also, they are not "shape-able" so that they
can assume the characteristic "curl" typical of any air hose that has
been used more than a few times.

I have contacted the manufacturer to inquire about these things, in
addition to encouraging him/her to consider producing the shorter
hoses, encompassing a generic "curl" in the process.

Brass hoses: In the meantime, I continue to use the brass air hoses.
They do look great, especially shaped and painted, but I have learned
the hard way that they are the very last thing that I install after
the car is otherwise painted, decaled, weathered, and ready to put on
the track. Every single time that I have fractured a hose, it has been
the result of personally handling, unlike the plastic hoses, which
litter the layout just by looking at them!

I pulled out of the drawer an new-old stock paper envelope of HO A-C
rubber air hoses, a remnant of a purchase made c. 1950. Out spilled a
rubber hose made from wire insulation that scaled out to be about 4"
thick, was stiff as a board, and crumbled when picked up!

Presuming a significant interval improvement in rubber technology ,
just how long will these rubber air hoses actually stand up?

Denny

Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento


Re: Rubber brake air hoses: a disappointment.

Charles Hladik
 

Denny,
I'm still using my cuttings from Micro-bulbs or other such wiring. It's
shapeable and sturdy. Don't know about the attachment to the new bracket, but
angle cocks fit ok, you can cut them to length and seeing as they are excess
material, they are FREE.
Chuck Hladik
Rutland Railroad
Virginia Division

In a message dated 12/16/2008 2:47:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
danspach@macnexus.org writes:




Continuing a mild obsession of both creating much more accurate
prototypical detailing for the ends of our steam era freight cars, AND
retaining good reliable handling and operating characteristics while
doing so, I have continued my quest for the ideal air brake hose/
mounting that both looks good AND stands up to more than a few moments
of routine handling. The combination of both shape-able accurate
brass air hoses, and related angle cock brackets have seemed so far to
offer the best combination of both. However, despite absolutely
beautiful modeling accuracy, and the very good anchoring offered by
the new angle cock brackets, the projecting brass air hose still
offers a stiff prominent lever arm to snag the unwary, causing the
hose to fracture at its very thinnest and fine points: the hose
connection to the angle cock, or at the thin pipe between the angle
cock and the supporting U bolt bracket. The brass hoses are certainly
more hardy than the plastic hoses (and the plastic hoses are not
easily shape-able), but they are not perfect. Rubber hoses would seem
to be almost ideal, if they could be made with sufficient accurate
detailing, and were shape-able.

Along comes the rubber hoses produced by HiTech Details. I admit I was
dubious that such fine hoses could be produced out of rubber- but they
do indeed appear to be fine, finely detailed, and with minimal effort
mountable in the new PSC angle cock brackets . However, expectations
were dashed when I noted a killer: the rubber brake hoses are the
27" length adopted by the AAR as standard sometime after 1957, NOT the
significantly shorter 22" length common to virtually every single one
of our steam era cars (my 1957 Car Builders Cyc shows 22", while my
1966 shows 27"). Mounting these hoses in proper locations on our cars
will cause them to drag along between the rails, and in my opinion,
also look terrible in the process.

Other downsides: a mounting lug allows the hoses to be mechanically
attached to the car bottom, but the lug is vertical, not angled to the
center as they should be. Also, they are not "shape-able" so that they
can assume the characteristic "curl" typical of any air hose that has
been used more than a few times.

I have contacted the manufacturer to inquire about these things, in
addition to encouraging him/her to consider producing the shorter
hoses, encompassing a generic "curl" in the process.

Brass hoses: In the meantime, I continue to use the brass air hoses.
They do look great, especially shaped and painted, but I have learned
the hard way that they are the very last thing that I install after
the car is otherwise painted, decaled, weathered, and ready to put on
the track. Every single time that I have fractured a hose, it has been
the result of personally handling, unlike the plastic hoses, which
litter the layout just by looking at them!

I pulled out of the drawer an new-old stock paper envelope of HO A-C
rubber air hoses, a remnant of a purchase made c. 1950. Out spilled a
rubber hose made from wire insulation that scaled out to be about 4"
thick, was stiff as a board, and crumbled when picked up!

Presuming a significant interval improvement in rubber technology ,
just how long will these rubber air hoses actually stand up?

Denny

Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento




**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)


Re: CSOX 5394 question

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 16, 2008, at 5:27 AM, James McDonald wrote:

Hello all,

Can anyone give me details on tank car CSOX 5394? My resources at
hand, as well as the archives of this list, have been consulted and
I'm coming up short.

The background: in another group I read in, which does not concern
itself primarily with freight cars, a question was raised about what
tank cars would be doing at a feed mill in the late 1940's and early
1950's. There are a number of photos of different tank cars parked at
a feed mill in Bel Air, MD on the M&P. One such car was Cities
Service CSOX 5394.

I'm hoping that by determining what that car's characteristics are,
we can narrow down on the commodity somewhat.
















James, I can probably tell you a lot about the car if you could send
me a scan of the photo. Unfortunately, the ORER entries for many
tank car owners were not very informative, and that's the case with
Cities Service. CSOX 5394 falls into the number series 5200-6999,
all of which were class TM and 80,000 lbs. nominal capacity, which
probably means that they were 8,000 gal. cars. I have photos of a
couple of cars in the series and they're quite different in design,
builder, etc., so it's obvious that Cities Service just lumped a
bunch of dissimilar 8,000 gal. cars into a single series. Further
complication comes from the fact that, in the 1940s, Cities Service
was in the process of renumbering many cars which originally had EORX
reporting marks into the CSOX series, so some or all of the 5200-6999
series cars were probably former EORX cars with different numbers.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Intermountain 1958 Cu. Ft. 2-Bay Hopper.

Arnold van Heyst
 

Accurate enough for mid 50's.

Arnold van Heyst
Netherlands.http://www.flickr.com/photos/heyst/


Rubber brake air hoses: a disappointment.

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

Continuing a mild obsession of both creating much more accurate prototypical detailing for the ends of our steam era freight cars, AND retaining good reliable handling and operating characteristics while doing so, I have continued my quest for the ideal air brake hose/ mounting that both looks good AND stands up to more than a few moments of routine handling. The combination of both shape-able accurate brass air hoses, and related angle cock brackets have seemed so far to offer the best combination of both. However, despite absolutely beautiful modeling accuracy, and the very good anchoring offered by the new angle cock brackets, the projecting brass air hose still offers a stiff prominent lever arm to snag the unwary, causing the hose to fracture at its very thinnest and fine points: the hose connection to the angle cock, or at the thin pipe between the angle cock and the supporting U bolt bracket. The brass hoses are certainly more hardy than the plastic hoses (and the plastic hoses are not easily shape-able), but they are not perfect. Rubber hoses would seem to be almost ideal, if they could be made with sufficient accurate detailing, and were shape-able.

Along comes the rubber hoses produced by HiTech Details. I admit I was dubious that such fine hoses could be produced out of rubber- but they do indeed appear to be fine, finely detailed, and with minimal effort mountable in the new PSC angle cock brackets . However, expectations were dashed when I noted a killer: the rubber brake hoses are the 27" length adopted by the AAR as standard sometime after 1957, NOT the significantly shorter 22" length common to virtually every single one of our steam era cars (my 1957 Car Builders Cyc shows 22", while my 1966 shows 27"). Mounting these hoses in proper locations on our cars will cause them to drag along between the rails, and in my opinion, also look terrible in the process.

Other downsides: a mounting lug allows the hoses to be mechanically attached to the car bottom, but the lug is vertical, not angled to the center as they should be. Also, they are not "shape-able" so that they can assume the characteristic "curl" typical of any air hose that has been used more than a few times.

I have contacted the manufacturer to inquire about these things, in addition to encouraging him/her to consider producing the shorter hoses, encompassing a generic "curl" in the process.

Brass hoses: In the meantime, I continue to use the brass air hoses. They do look great, especially shaped and painted, but I have learned the hard way that they are the very last thing that I install after the car is otherwise painted, decaled, weathered, and ready to put on the track. Every single time that I have fractured a hose, it has been the result of personally handling, unlike the plastic hoses, which litter the layout just by looking at them!

I pulled out of the drawer an new-old stock paper envelope of HO A-C rubber air hoses, a remnant of a purchase made c. 1950. Out spilled a rubber hose made from wire insulation that scaled out to be about 4" thick, was stiff as a board, and crumbled when picked up!

Presuming a significant interval improvement in rubber technology , just how long will these rubber air hoses actually stand up?

Denny


Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento

108461 - 108480 of 186229