Date   

Re: RP CYC 12

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Roger Parry wrote:
"I am truly sorry BUT, what are youall talking about? I am somewhat
new to this list but have no idea what all this is about. Can someone
fill me in??"

Roger, go to the message archive and search for Message #45167, posted
September 10, 2005.


Ben Hom


Re: new PRR caboose from Walthers

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Eric Hansmann wrote:
"I knew it was an N6b, and I thought I typed N6b as well....but
check the link and compare the proto image of the N6b with the
lettering images. Those lettering images are not N6b cabins."
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/932-7641

Recently, I wrote my contact in Walthers product development
regarding these and other lettering diagrams now used to illustrate
available paint schemes. These almost always contain incorrect
lettering "fonts", profiles, or other incosistencies leading buyers
to believe that Walthers failed to do their homework, potentially
costing them sales. He replied that product development had already
voiced that concern, but were vetoed by marketing (whose idea it was
to use these diagrams.)

I have not been involved with this project, but I know the people in
the PRRT&HS who are working this project, and I'm confident that the
final product will be much better than represented in those
lettering diagrams.


Ben Hom


Re: RP CYC 12

Roger Parry <uncleroger@...>
 

I am truly sorry BUT, what are youall talking about? I am somewhat new to this list but have no idea what all this is about. Can someone fill me in??

On Oct 8, 2005, at 3:24 PM, Patrick Wider wrote:

Here are the reasons for our special pre-publication offer: Past a certain time (i.e., after
taking advantage of "bulk" shipping rates), our USPS shipping rates go through the roof.
(UPS Green or Brown is no better). We're actually trying to pass on our savings to everyone
if we can do it. But the window is limited. Once the 300 piece or greater shipment goes
out, the higher shipping rates apply. Also, we don't relish shipping onesy and twosy
amounts every other day. But we do it. Most business courses also teach you that you
need an "act now" to give people an extra incentive. Otherwise, people put your mailings
on a pile and then promptly forget about them. I'm sorry to cause all of the resulting
STMFC angst over $5. I also apologize to this group for volume 11 (all passenger cars). I
don't know what made me do it! (-:

BTW: we ain't getting rich doing this. Also, Ed Hawkins is down in Texas this weekend and
should be returning with a nice assortment of original General American builder's
photographs (sorry, no black freight cars Richard). We hope to share them with you.

Pat Wider



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "joe binish" <joebinish@e...> wrote:

I also saw the announcement on this list, was mulling my checkbook when a
direct email to me from Msr Hawkins prompted me to send off my payment.
Hope to receive mine today, so I can get out of housework!

Joe Binish







Yahoo! Groups Links








T&P 40' Fixed End Gon - Sunshine 67.16

Jerry Dziedzic
 

This concerns the T&P 17000-17749 series gons.

Sunshine's Proto Data Sheet 67.2 reads: "The rebuildings came during a
period when red paint began to be applied to T&P gons. By the early
Fifties at least, the T&P herald was being applied to new gons . . .
There is no known precise date of the new paint and lettering
standard . . . "

Has any information emerged that pins down the date T&P began
repainting these gons from black to red?


UP Red Caboose G-50-13

Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
 

Guys I am building a model of a UP G-50-13 and was wondering if the trucks,
look like Barber S-2's, that come with the kit are correct.

Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY


Re: new PRR caboose from Walthers

Eric Hansmann <ehansmann@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Cich" <ajc5150@i...> wrote:

The upcoming Walthers car is an N6b. The lettering images all
show valid
N6b lettering schemes.

There is no such thing as an N8b, at least on the PRR.
===========================================


Dang gremlins.... I knew it was an N6b, and I thought I typed N6b as
well....but check the link and compare the proto image of the N6b
with the lettering images. Those lettering images are not N6b
cabins.
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/932-7641

The lettering images remind me of an MDC offering.

Eric Hansmann
Morgantown, W. Va.


Re: new PRR caboose from Walthers

Andy Cich <ajc5150@...>
 

Eric,

The upcoming Walthers car is an N6b. The lettering images all show valid
N6b lettering schemes.

There is no such thing as an N8b, at least on the PRR.

Andy Cich

-----Original Message-----
I know this is kinda old news, but I found some details at the Walthers site
for their upcoming PRR N8b caboose. Here's the link:

http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/932-7641

While there is no model image, does anyone else find it odd that the
lettering images for the car are NOT of an N8b caboose? This is quite a
mixed message in my book.

Eric Hansmann


new PRR caboose from Walthers

Eric Hansmann <ehansmann@...>
 

I know this is kinda old news, but I found some details at the Walthers site
for their upcoming PRR N8b caboose. Here's the link:

http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/932-7641



While there is no model image, does anyone else find it odd that the
lettering images for the car are NOT of an N8b caboose? This is quite a
mixed message in my book.



Eric Hansmann

Morgantown, W. Va.


Re: Scale Coupler Application

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

The recent interesting thread on scale couplers and boxes and their applications motivated me to do some measurements and experimentation today on two new-in-box Fifth Avenue Car Shops Milwaukee ribside double door boxcar kits, MILW 6600, and MILW 7037. Both cars had the standard moulded industry-standard draft gear boxes designed for drop in Kadee-type couplers, essentially identical to that found with almost all other contemporary styrene and urethane kits currently, and historically on the market.

My purpose was to first measure, and then install Kadee #78 scale couplers and boxes on one car, and install Accurail Accumate Proto scale couplers and boxes on the other, and compare experiences. Note that I have been installing the Accumate Proto couplers for some time (about 100 cars), and this was my first experience with a #78.

Because the coupler measurements have been gone over a number of times in the past on this list and elsewhere, I will simply stipulate that although both couplers have pluses and minuses in their details, both seem to look acceptably prototypical to me. The #78s, although fresh from the LHS, had the notorious "Gap", which I understand has since been corrected.

The measurement of the boxes against prototypes is listed below. Understand that draft gear "boxes" or housings are simply seemless extensions of the car's normal center beam or center sill, so are really not truly ever prototypically "independent". Their dimensions should reflect this by only sharing the same cross sectional measurements as the center sill.


In the figures below then, the "length" of the average prototypical draft gear "box/sill" (such as might be common on any 40' car) is as measured from the outside face back to then nearest margin of the body bolster.

Box Dimensions Kadee #78 AccProto Prototype

Length OA 0.475" (3'5-1/4") 0.640" (4'7-3/4") c. 4'4-10"
Width OA 0.258" (2'9-1/2") 0,236" (2'8-3/4") c. 1'6" (over flanges)
Depth OA 0.125" (1'1") 0.139" (12") c. 12-13"
Depth without bottom N/A 0.106" (9-1/4") N/A
Minimum length (cut) N/A 0.380" (2'9-1/4") N/A
Detailing None (box is trapezoidal) Some N/A

Preliminary Summary:

Both boxes are still much wider than the prototype (presumably a functional necessity). The overall depths are pretty accurate. The Accumate Proto box is long enough that it can stand in for the entire sill from the bolster to the draft gear face. The Kadee is too short in this regard. Shape and detailing (such as it is) is superior on the AP. The unusual trapezoidal shaped of the Kadee box is pronounced (presumably representing draft angles). This said, however, once installed these box differences will rarely in real time rarely be noticed.

Application:

I posted several days ago on the list my particular method of installing the AP boxes and couplers on my cars, and that is what I did today on car #1. Because the bottom or floor of the moulded box on the car under frame already represented the defined plane for the coupler shank, I nested the AP box into the larger box only after removing the smaller box's bottom lid. The AP box was also far too long to fit into the larger box without alteration. I could either cut the AP box short (which it is designed to allow to a defined location [see above], or I could remove the back wall of the larger box, along with the short center sill section just behind so that the AP box in toto could be set it place with its end abutting the body bolster- very prototypical. The latter is what I did.

After all tools were in place, the entire installation of the new AP couplers and boxes, and removal of all but the floors of the original moulded boxes took about 10-12" at most.

The second car was slated for the #78s. There was a cautionary hint of coming trouble when I read the very first sentence of the instructions on the packet:

"The #78 coupler is not designed to be used in the 'molded-on' round post coupler draft gear boxes [sic.]. We recommend using our scale #58 instead".

Well, you learn why very quickly: The principal 0-48 (or 0-80) fastening screw has the identical centering of the round post of the larger box (the hole in which is usually designed to house a much larger 2-56). Well, this was solved by filling the old post holes with some styrene rodding. Because of the relative shortness of the box, I also trimmed the back wall of the moulded box and the adjacent centersill so that the #78 box could set right in. The trapezoidal shape of the back of the box created only a minor fitting problem.

The second (and much bigger) problem is that unlike the AccProto box, the depth of the #78 box *cannot* be reduced to accommodate the thickness of the moulded box floor already in place. Bummer. The only solutions would be to 1) machine down the moulded box floor- not an easy job, or a job without hazard for those not prepared for it; or 2) Mount the intact box on top of the old floor and then just jack up the trucks. Since I was not inclined to do the former (I have tried it in the past and- what a lot of work!), and because the latter could be undone, I mounted the boxes intact. To get the couplers to a standard height (Kadee height gauge), however, I had to jack up the trucks a full .060" (the car looks like it is in flood pants).

Well, after small squirts of Kadee "Grease-Em" in all the new boxes, both cars went onto the layout. All coupled well repeatedly with each other, and with other cars on a 42" curve. Sometimes I thought that the #78 tended to couple easier, but if so, it wasn't consistent, or in the end- persuasive.

So, what are my preliminary conclusions, assuming my "given" that scale couplers have to be housed in scale draft gear boxes: For the majority of kits out there with already moulded-on draft gear boxes, the Accumate Proto couplers would still seem to be near the only game in town.

Although I will be removing the #78s and replacing them with the Accumate Protos, I will be saving the former to use on some brass cars that do not share the same inherent problems of the moulded boxes.

Two other packages of #78s will be returned to the LHS, to a great extent because of the "Gaps"--, which *are* truly disconcerting.

BTW, these new Fifth Avenue DD ribside cars are beautiful, and beautifully finished. I am doing some (but not a lot of) redetailing, folllowing some of Mont Switzer's good suggestions recently in MM. (I cannot work half as fast as he does- routinely).

Denny






--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento, California


SAL Auto Boxes - Was Re: Were there 10' IH 50' 1937 AAR DD boxcars

paulbizier <pa.bizier@...>
 

There have been several articles in Lines South (the ACL/SAL HS mag) on
SAL auto boxes... these include data on the SAL 50' cars, as well as
both the composite and steel 40' cars.

Paul


Re: RP CYC 12

Patrick Wider <pwider@...>
 

Here are the reasons for our special pre-publication offer: Past a certain time (i.e., after
taking advantage of "bulk" shipping rates), our USPS shipping rates go through the roof.
(UPS Green or Brown is no better). We're actually trying to pass on our savings to everyone
if we can do it. But the window is limited. Once the 300 piece or greater shipment goes
out, the higher shipping rates apply. Also, we don't relish shipping onesy and twosy
amounts every other day. But we do it. Most business courses also teach you that you
need an "act now" to give people an extra incentive. Otherwise, people put your mailings
on a pile and then promptly forget about them. I'm sorry to cause all of the resulting
STMFC angst over $5. I also apologize to this group for volume 11 (all passenger cars). I
don't know what made me do it! (-:

BTW: we ain't getting rich doing this. Also, Ed Hawkins is down in Texas this weekend and
should be returning with a nice assortment of original General American builder's
photographs (sorry, no black freight cars Richard). We hope to share them with you.

Pat Wider

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "joe binish" <joebinish@e...> wrote:

I also saw the announcement on this list, was mulling my checkbook when a
direct email to me from Msr Hawkins prompted me to send off my payment.
Hope to receive mine today, so I can get out of housework!

Joe Binish


Re: Were there 10' IH 50' 1937 AAR DD boxcars?

al_brown03
 

There's an article on SAL steel boxcars, with a picture or two of each
class, in Lines South for 2nd quarter 2005, pp 4-13. The A-1 class,
which were rebuilt from old gondolas, looked especially odd: a real
modeling challenge!

Given the title of this thread, it may be worth re-emphasizing that
classes AF and A-2 were 50' cars, but SAL's other double-door boxcars
(A-1 and AF-1 through AF-5) were all 40' cars.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Wider" <pwider@s...> wrote:

I forgot to mention that AF-1's were numbered 11000-11699. FYI: I'm
doing an article on
the SAL turtle-back cars for RP CYC Vol. 13.

Pat Wider

AF-2's were numbered 11700-11999 and 22000-22199.

A-1's were numbered 9011-9060.

Pat Wider


Walthers GACX wood reefer addenum

Eric Hansmann <ehansmann@...>
 

I have picked up a few of these cars and noticed a different truck style on
one I bought last week. Walthers has produced these cars with two different
trucks. I have models in NKP and PFE paint and lettering with trucks that
Walthers refers to as Pullman trucks. They can be seen here:

http://www.walthers.com/prodimage/0932/09320000005472.gif

I picked up an L&N car this week with GSC Commonwealth-style trucks. Here's
the L&N car with these new trucks:

http://www.walthers.com/prodimage/0932/09320000005488.gif

The box for the L&N model is clearly marked "with GSC truck" on the label. I
don't have the other two boxes handy, but I recall I saw a notation of "with
bolted pedestal trucks" noted on the box label on the store shelf this past
week.

I didn't think this was noted in the recent GACX reefer discussions. Then
again, this may be a new development.

Eric Hansmann
Morgantown, W. Va.


Re: RP CYC 12

joe binish <joebinish@...>
 

I also saw the announcement on this list, was mulling my checkbook when a
direct email to me from Msr Hawkins prompted me to send off my payment.
Hope to receive mine today, so I can get out of housework!

Joe Binish


Re: RP CYC 12

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Jim Brewer wrote:
"As I recall, there was a posting to this list from Ed Hawkins well in
advance giving the details of what was in this issue, the advance
purchase price, drop dead cut-off date, etc."

Message #45167, posted September 10, 2005. Advance orders had to be
in by September 26th.


Ben Hom


Re: RP CYC 12

Storey Lindsay
 

Yes, on September 9.

Storey Lindsay
Celje, Slovenia

----- Original Message -----
From: "James F. Brewer" <jfbrewer@comcast.net>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 13:20
Subject: [STMFC] RP CYC 12


As I recall, there was a posting to this list from Ed Hawkins well in advance giving the details of what was in this issue, the advance purchase price, drop dead cut-off date, etc. I know I saw it because that is what prompted me to order it.

Jim Brewer
Glenwood MD



Re: interesting COSX tank car in MR

Montford Switzer <ZOE@...>
 

Richard:

Thanks for the explanation. Things are as I suspected.

Mont Switzer

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Richard Hendrickson
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:19 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] interesting COSX tank car in MR

On Oct 7, 2005, at 1:46 PM, Montford Switzer wrote:

Richard:

Please help me and possibly others understand how a single compartment
tank car can be converted to multiple compartments. You refer to a
diaphragm, the wall between the compartments, which I know as a
"bulkhead" with the ends being "heads." Bulkheads could be both
single
and double (air space between compartments).

Now, how did they do it? The word diaphragm throws me. Did they
assemble the bulkhead inside the barrel after putting it in through
the
dome opening in pieces (doubtful)? Or did they make the conversion by
removing one of the heads (ends of the barrel) and slide the bulkhead
(partition or diaphragm) in the end? I suspect this was the method.
And were rivets were used for both the new bulkheads and the new dome?
A diaphragm was an internal bulkhead, which looked exactly like a tank
end because that's what it was. They were fitted in pairs with air
space in between (and drain holes at the bottom of the air spaces so
that it would be apparent if any of the compartments leaked inside the
tank shell). They were riveted in place just like a tank end and, as
you infer, the conversion was carried out by removing and replacing one
or both tank ends. For a shop equipped to work on tanks, such a
conversion was a relatively simple operation.

Richard Hendrickson





Yahoo! Groups Links


RP CYC 12

James F. Brewer <jfbrewer@...>
 

As I recall, there was a posting to this list from Ed Hawkins well in advance giving the details of what was in this issue, the advance purchase price, drop dead cut-off date, etc. I know I saw it because that is what prompted me to order it.

Jim Brewer
Glenwood MD


Couplers.

Arnold van Heyst
 

A short comment from the Netherlands,

Kadee #12/58/78/2100 are the best working, and the best looking couplers for U.S. models.
For instance:
I've replaced the MäTrix U.P. cabooses standaard couplers with #78 incl. airhose, etc.
Same for the MäTrix Big Boy:
I've modified de "58" box, and add the coupler in it, and glued it in the tenderframe.
Most of my cars are fitted wit 58's.
It looks so much better with it, especially with the Proto 2000 8.000/10.000 gallon cars.
For me?
No Sergent, but Kadee scalecouplers.
Oh..............i'm about the replace the old Kadee boxcars with #2100 retrofit.

Regards,
Arnold van Heyst
Netherlands.


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.


Tungsten & Depleted Uranium (was Scale Coupler boxes)

Andy Carlson
 

22 years ago a friend was engaged in making a N scale
engine for challenging the title of most N scale cars
pulled by a single locomotive. The then champ was a
kitbash of 2 GE U30CG wide bodies with 16 wheel drive.
That locomotive was weighted with depleted uranium
(the builder was a retired Nasa engineer) and could
pull 400+ cars, I recall. To make my friends N&W John
Henry heavy, I supplied a big chunck of tungsten,
which is about 1/2 again more dense than lead, and a
bit more than the depleted uranium. The finished loco
weighed 1 1/2 pounds (this is N scale) but never got a
chance for a pull off. Politics by the current record
holder dictated that these contests served no purpose,
so he retired the loco "undefeated". The tungsten had
to be broken into pieces.
-Andy Carlson
Ojai Ca

--- Patrick Wider <pwider@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Back at Boeing, I know an engineer who has a very
large chunk of tungsten on his desk as
a gag. Unsuspecting people come along, curiosity
overcomes them, and more often than
not, they try to pick it up. It's a riot to see the
look on their faces when they can barely
budge the thing. And God forbid they should
accidently drop it on their foot. The stuff
would make ideal hidden weights for flat cars. So
would depleted uranium.

134861 - 134880 of 181204