Date   

Re: old question about roof walks for new members

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Ed Mines wrote:
I know that at least a few railroads specified
that the roof walks be unpainted.
Which ones? and were they wood or steel?

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: RPI web site

Rich Yoder
 

YEa I was just there.
Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim O'Connor" <@timboconnor>
To: <stmfc@...>
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 4:37 PM
Subject: [STMFC] RPI web site



Anyone had any luck accessing the web site lately?





Yahoo! Groups Links







Re: old question about roof walks for new members

Tim O'Connor
 

Here's an old question about roof walks for new members - Were many
steam era roof walks (particularly wooden roof walks) unpainted? This
is particularly addressed to men who actually were atop the cars.
Ed,

The half-life of unpainted wood in railroad service is quite brief.
I've never seen a photo of a new box car with an unpainted wooden
running board. Replacement planks sometimes did not get painted, or
sometimes the paint just wore off.


Re: reefer pix

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Oct 23, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

Naperville is also know as "The Freight Car Nationals" and "Martin's
Tupperware Party" Because you get a free gift, I guess.
Any other good nic-names?
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa
The Grand Convocation of the Loyal Order of Prototype Police?
Tony and I will be there with our badges. Bozos beware.

Richard Hendrickson


PROTO:HO Accumate couplers

Tim O'Connor
 

FYI, regarding the scale Accumates on small radii, Max Robin
posted this to the STMFC almost 5 years ago:

==============================================================

We were in Montreal for our usual anniversary celebration Christmas week
when we got word of the impending snow storm at home. Got home on
Saturday @ 2:30 AM only to find a box from Bob Walker w/100 pr. of
Accurail's new couplers. After I unloaded the car, etc. I was so fired
up that I went and installed a couple of pairs on some of their USRA DS
boxcars. Wow!! They seemed to track just fine whether being pushed or pulled
on 15"R. reverse curves, coupled to each other or real #5s. Shoved a string
of cars up the 10 1/2% 15"R curve to the 1st switchback and they worked
just fine.

These PROTO:HO couplers, combined w/NWSL PROTO:HO Code 88 and/or Code 72
wheelsets make it seem like there is finely a real alternative for those
of us who operate our railroads, resin cars and all, but still want
finer standards than the workhorse Kadee #5 or #58 and the Code 110
RP-25 wheel standard! Yes, if one car is on the end of a sharp (<20"R)
curve, the coupler will need to be nudged over w/a Switchman, toothpick
or similar tool, just like the prototype.

In my mind they are definitely a winner. I only hope the rest of the
model community agrees.

Max


old question about roof walks for new members

ed_mines
 

Here's an old question about roof walks for new members - Were many
steam era roof walks (particularly wooden roof walks) unpainted? This
is particularly addressed to men who actually were atop the cars.

I've seen a couple of photos were the grain of roof walk planks is
clearly visible and I know that at least a few railroads specified
that the roof walks be unpainted.

Ed Mines


RPI web site

Tim O'Connor
 

Anyone had any luck accessing the web site lately?


Re: LV hoppers in 1945

ed_mines
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Eric Hansmann" <ehansmann@a...> wrote:
How does this one fit for description #7?
http://www.westerfield.biz/7408.htm
If it fits the description the description wasn't very good. The car
shown was probably gone by 1945.
The #7 hoppers (sounds like a take out restaurant) had 6 diagonal
braces on each side including a pair that went over the open areas
beneath the slope sheets.

Ed


Re: reefer pix

Tim O'Connor
 

Naperville is also know as "The Freight Car Nationals" and "Martin's
Tupperware Party" Because you get a free gift, I guess.
Any other good nic-names?
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa
The Grand Convocation of the Loyal Order of Prototype Police?


Re: reefer pix

rockroll50401 <cepropst@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Thomas Baker" <bakert@a...> wrote:


Clark and others,

I checked the site just this morning, and it came up. Wow! I am
overwhelmed. Wish I could get to Naperville.

Tom

Tom,
I just forwarded a message friend. Tom Wencl found the photos.

Naperville is also know as "The Freight Car Nationals" and "Martin's
Tupperware Party" Because you get a free gift, I guess.

Any other good nic-names?

Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa


Need some help please

pierreoliver2003 <pierre.oliver@...>
 

List,
Two things,
Can someone direct me to a source for O Scale Carmer cut levers. Brass.
I'm in the midst of building a Chooch Ultra-scale SP B50-15 boxcar and
am in great need of a photo or two of the door and all it's hardware.
I'm finding the Chooch instruction a little lacking in the drawing
department.
Thakns,
Pierre Oliver


Re: reefer pix

Thomas Baker
 

Clark and others,

I checked the site just this morning, and it came up. Wow! I am overwhelmed. Wish I could get to Naperville.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... on behalf of Clark Propst
Sent: Thu 10/20/2005 4:50 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] reefer pix

This site has some very nice stuff for Freight Car fans.

http://www.geocities.com/oldlahistory/reefer.html


If this doesn't get you pumped up for Naperville, nothing will. I can't wait.

Regards,

Tom Wencl







Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: IOX 2144 & MDC 6k gallon OT tank car

Andrew Baird
 

I have a few shots of IOX cars, but they are the narrow gauge versions in Newfoundland, Canada. One is a single dome, two shots of double dome cars.

Andrew

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Gilbert" <tgilbert@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] IOX 2144 & MDC 6k gallon OT tank car


Richard Hendrickson wrote:

Definitely a UTL Class X tank car, Ron. UTL apparently had a close
relationship with Imperial Oil, whose 2,200 car tank car fleet they
purchased in 1953, and may have licensed Imperial to have cars built by
CC&F to the UTL Class X design.
Imperial Oil was 70% owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey (trade name
ESSO). UTL was the lessor for all "Baby Standard" fleets after the break
up of the Trust in 1911. According to Carr's ROCKEFELLER'S SECRET
WEAPON, UTL insisted upon being the exclusive lessor for companies it
served. As some of the "Baby Standard's" bought operations outside the
Standards Oil framework after the break up of the Trust, the Baby
Standards did own their own tank cars. But the business seems to have
been limited to areas in which the purchased organizations operated -
e.g. Socony Vacuum (later Mobil) purchased the Magnolia Petroleum Co. in
1928, and the MPCX were still in effect in the 1950's; Socony also
purchased a number of small Mid West operators in the 1930's, and their
tank cars operated independently of UTL finally forming the core of tank
cars using the SVX and SVM reporting marks.

IOX was probably kept apart from UTL in an effort to separate Canadian
from American operations until the 1950's.

Tim Gilbert

Also, it was definitely a 6K gal. car;
the dome doesn't look to me as if it was oversize and the tank wasn't
long enough for an 8K gal. Class X.

Richard Hendrickson


------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group "STMFC <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC>"
on the web.

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@...
<mailto:STMFC-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.


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







Yahoo! Groups Links





IOX 3150

Rob Kirkham <rdkirkham@...>
 

Thanks for pointing out the drawings of IOX 3150 Steve. Canadian Railway Modeller republished a version of these drawings with a photo and dimensional information a few years back (the pages I saved don't have the year or issue "code"). The article indicates these were CC&F cars, and referenced the following general drawings: Body and Brake Arrangement H-438. Tank H-439. Truck F-520. The brakes were Westinghouse KC 1012 with K2 triple valve. It does bear a strong resemblance to COBX 2543 shown in the Glenbow photo. That may be one worth obtaining a good print so the details can be better visualized. Anyone care to offer a comment on the colour of COBX 2543? I would guess a black lower course and band up the midle, including the dome.

Rob Kirkham


Re: URTX reefers (was: reefer pix)

Gregg Mahlkov <mahlkov@...>
 

Mike and list,

When InterMountain first entered the N scale market, I called them about obtaining parts and in a fairly wide ranging discussion, I-M freely admitted that many cars were "approximations", that is, if the car length and door width were the same, the scheme might well be offered. The first GN boxcar was cited as an example.

So, InterMountain makes no public committment to absolute accuracy.

Gregg Mahlkov

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Brock" <brockm@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] URTX reefers (was: reefer pix)



Phil Buchwald writes:

Now, I purchased an Intermountain R-40-23 kit, lettered for URTX
and numbered 37193. I impulse bought it, assuming that it was
correctly lettered; my understanding was that Intermountain only did
prototype paint schemes.
Well....I hate to be the first one to tell you
this...but...uh...Intermountain is not ruled by prototypically correct paint
schemes. In fact, the R-40-23 is a very good model of...well...an
R-40-23...which was built for PFE in rather large numbers and is an
important car in the PFE fleet. NP had a much smaller number of clones of
the R-40-23. Other than that...

Mike Brock








Yahoo! Groups Links







Re: URTX reefers (was: reefer pix)

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Phil Buchwald writes:

Now, I purchased an Intermountain R-40-23 kit, lettered for URTX
and numbered 37193. I impulse bought it, assuming that it was
correctly lettered; my understanding was that Intermountain only did
prototype paint schemes.
Well....I hate to be the first one to tell you this...but...uh...Intermountain is not ruled by prototypically correct paint schemes. In fact, the R-40-23 is a very good model of...well...an R-40-23...which was built for PFE in rather large numbers and is an important car in the PFE fleet. NP had a much smaller number of clones of the R-40-23. Other than that...

Mike Brock


URTX reefers (was: reefer pix)

buchwaldfam <duff@...>
 

Great photos!

There is one photo at the link below which shows a prototype which is
very similar to the Walthers horizontal belt steel reefers.

http://www.geocities.com/oldlahistory/urtx37151.jpg

Now, I purchased an Intermountain R-40-23 kit, lettered for URTX
and numbered 37193. I impulse bought it, assuming that it was
correctly lettered; my understanding was that Intermountain only did
prototype paint schemes. Did URTX have both the Walthers AND the
Intermountain style cars in the 37XXX series? Since they are both
steel, swing door, iced reefers, there wouldn't be a distinction in
the ORER. I would take IM's word for it that the scheme is
prototypical for this style of reefer, except that I had to sand the
B&O "overnight" lettering off of an IM PS-1 that I also bought on
impulse.

Thanks in advance,
Phil Buchwald



--- In STMFC@..., "Clark Propst" <cepropst@n...> wrote:

This site has some very nice stuff for Freight Car fans.

http://www.geocities.com/oldlahistory/reefer.html


If this doesn't get you pumped up for Naperville, nothing will. I
can't wait.

Regards,

Tom Wencl

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


New file uploaded to STMFC

STMFC@...
 

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the STMFC
group.

File : /4060totalboxcarsUSownership.xls
Uploaded by : timgilbert17851 <tgilbert@...>
Description : Listing of Amounts and Percents of Nat'l Fleet of Boxcars Owned by Class I RR's in the US Broken Down Into ICC Regions and the Larger RR's for Selected Years between 1940 and 1960.

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/4060totalboxcarsUSownership.xls

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

timgilbert17851 <tgilbert@...>


Re: SUPX 20xx & UTLX 13504

Steve and Barb Hile
 

Rob,

I have a copy of that photo that I purchased from Frank Ellington years ago. I am not sure that this car really has truss rods. The outer part of the underframe is pretty substatial and you can just the the lower edge of the center sill in the light, below the sides, with its regullarly spaced rivets. There are two "rod-like sillouettes belove the car. One is clearly the brake rod conncected to the brake lever. I will speculate that the other is the brake pipe, train line, although I can't guess why it hangs so low. The vertical shadow (directly below the 1 in 13504) looks less like a queen post than a hanger. Plus, just before that "rod" passes into the shadows of the left hand truck, we can see what appears to be the branch pipe to the brake cylinder as another vertical shadow.

There certainly were tank car underframes with truss rods, even some advertized as "all steel." I have seen photos that show the truss rods terminating in the head blocks rather than the end sills. 13504 has no head blocks. Its tanks must be secured to the center sill with Van Dyke's X mount and strapped. Here can be determined another reason for one tank with three compartments. This car requires 3 separate mountings to the center sill and 6 straps. A 3 compartment single tank requires one center sill mounting and 4 straps.

I hope this helps.

Regards,
Steve Hile

----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Kirkham
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 9:40 PM
Subject: [STMFC] SUPX 20xx & UTLX 13504


Since my last e-mail on this subject, I've noticed (again) a very good shot
of a similar three tank car, UTLX 13504 in Edward Kaminski's Tank Cars:
American Car & Foundry Co. 1865 to 1955, p.150. This is closer to a 3/4
view, and shows part of the B end end sill. The big bolt heads I'd
haveexpected for the truss rod ends are not, however, in view. Curious.
Makes me wonder more about how the truss rods worked.

Also, this is the second car I've noted this evening showing what seems to
my uneducated eyes to be a UTLX / Imperial Oil link in the purchase of
freight equipment.

Rob Kirkham




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "STMFC" on the web.

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

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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


Re: IOX 2144 & MDC 6k gallon OT tank car

Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:

Definitely a UTL Class X tank car, Ron. UTL apparently had a close
relationship with Imperial Oil, whose 2,200 car tank car fleet they
purchased in 1953, and may have licensed Imperial to have cars built by
CC&F to the UTL Class X design.
Imperial Oil was 70% owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey (trade name
ESSO). UTL was the lessor for all "Baby Standard" fleets after the break
up of the Trust in 1911. According to Carr's ROCKEFELLER'S SECRET
WEAPON, UTL insisted upon being the exclusive lessor for companies it
served. As some of the "Baby Standard's" bought operations outside the
Standards Oil framework after the break up of the Trust, the Baby
Standards did own their own tank cars. But the business seems to have
been limited to areas in which the purchased organizations operated -
e.g. Socony Vacuum (later Mobil) purchased the Magnolia Petroleum Co. in
1928, and the MPCX were still in effect in the 1950's; Socony also
purchased a number of small Mid West operators in the 1930's, and their
tank cars operated independently of UTL finally forming the core of tank
cars using the SVX and SVM reporting marks.

IOX was probably kept apart from UTL in an effort to separate Canadian
from American operations until the 1950's.

Tim Gilbert

Also, it was definitely a 6K gal. car;
the dome doesn't look to me as if it was oversize and the tank wasn't
long enough for an 8K gal. Class X.

Richard Hendrickson


------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group "STMFC <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC>"
on the web.

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@...
<mailto:STMFC-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.


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