Date   

Re: Covered Hoppers/Grain

rwitt_2000 <rmwitt@...>
 

"James F. Brewer" wrote:
Tony and Tim,

Thanks for the info! Now I know the mills on my N&W Shenandoah
Valley circa 1956 model railroad probably received inbound shipments
in boxcars.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim O'Connor" <timboconnor@c...>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Covered Hoppers/Grain



Grain-capable covered hoppers (approx 3200+ cubic feet) began
to be delivered in the late 1950's. The PS 2893's delivered in
the mid 50's could carry grain but not to their load limit. For
example you may remember the Jack Frost sugar hoppers (which
did exist) which could hold a full load, because sugar is 10%
denser than corn (50lbs/cft instead of 45lbs/cft). Most of the
early 2893+ cft, 3 bay covered hoppers were used for minerals
and industrial products (like roofing granules). Later most of
these cars got 100 ton trucks and reinforced underframes and
carried even denser cargo like cement, silica sand, limestone.


Jim Brewer wrote:
Is it true that covered hoppers were not used to haul grain prior to
1960? I realize that grain was hauled in boxcars for many
years, but
thought the larger capacity covered hoppers developed in the
50's were
intened, at least in part, to haul grain.
I think the 1960 date is a trifle late, but not much.
Practically all those hundreds of 2000-cubic-foot cars built through
the 50s were for cement and comparable loads. At the end of the 50s
true grain cars did begin to appear, but 1960 is not, to my mind, very
late. Perhaps someone has more specifics.
For certain railroads this statement is essentially true. The B&O did
not receive "grain" hoppers until the early 1960s. Having no money
probably affected their decision. I recall seeing in the early 1960s
in Hicksville, Ohio B&O ARA boxcars, Class M-26s, being prepared with
"grain doors" to ship the harvest.

Bob Witt


Re: Sergent Couplers (was coupler debate)

Tim O'Connor
 

Yes, but the electromagnet would have to be OVER the track.

The Sergent coupler has a tiny metal ball inside that acts like
the locking pin on the prototype. It has to move upwards to
unlock the knuckle. In fact a good strong anisotropic magnet
mounted on a small stick, held above the cars should work very
well. This is also how passenger cars with diaphragms should
be quite easy to uncouple. Of course the car itself should not
be attracted to magnets or you'll have a problem...

If you have never seen tiny, super-strong anisotropic magnets,
then go buy one just to see how incredibly powerful they are.
http://www.dansdata.com/images/magnets/magnets480.jpg
They have many high precision applications, like disk drives.

Tim O.

If the Sergeant couplers can be uncoupled by a magnetic wand, would it
be possible to have some sort of electromagnet operated uncoupler - so
you could achieve the same effects as the Kadee?


Re: Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

bierglaeser <bierglaeser@...>
 

Tim,
When you say "couple a bit too closely" so you mean closer than the
correct scale dimension or closer than practical for good operation
on typical HO scale curves and turnouts?
Gene Green

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, timboconnor@c... wrote:
Denny,

Although I use the Accurail scale boxes, and appreciate their
detail, I still wish they were made of STYRENE instead of a
material that repels every adhesive known to man. The only
way to attach them is with screws, which mars their appearance
and is also problematic in many cases. The material also is not
easy to cut or file cleanly. What the heck is it made of anyway?
Did I mention they're not easy to paint either?

Mr. Storzek are you listening? :-)

And I have learned to position the draft gear a bit further than
the prototype, because the face of the coupler doesn't protude
as far from the box as a Kadee -- the result being that two cars
with them couple a bit too closely.

Tim O'Connor


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

Gatwood, Elden <Elden.Gatwood@...>
 

Bill;
I believe door and a half cars on the PRR (X28) were introduced to
accommodate auto loading, but were made obsolete by the introduction of
the larger volume, and wider door opening provided by the double-door
X31, which also provided more interior height for those loaders and
bigger vehicles. The X28 were then converted to X28A by elimination of
the auxiliary door, and put back in general service.

Didn't the N&W have a similar experience with the BPa (am I getting that
one right?), but just elect to seal the door?

I don't know off hand how many of the later X37 classes and other
classes were originally provided as double door cars, but they had some
percentage converted back to single door by fixing the auxiliary door in
place, presumably as the need for the wider opening was no longer
needed. In fact, the history of the fleet is replete with examples of
them adding or subtracting doors. Some portion of the end door cars
like the X41A were also sealed at the end, for conversion to another
configuration. As late as the early 60's, they were adding a second
door to cars not originally equipped as such, like the X41E conversions.

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Bill McCoy
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 5:59 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Were there 10' IH 50' 1937 AAR DD boxcars?

I'm working on a presentation for Naperville on Central of Georgia
steel boxcars. In 1937 the CG started to accumulate a sizable fleet of
50' door and a half 10' IH boxcars. They have the 4-5 ends and Murphy
square panel roofs that were on so many 1937 AAR 40s. Was there an AAR
spec for a 50' version? Was there an AAR spec for a 40' double door
car?

I also have hit a dead end on why the passion for door and a half 40s
and 50s like the Central had. It's a combination of 4' and 6'
Younsgstown - Camel doors. I know N&W had a fleet of the combo 40s and
the SAL had a fleet of 50s with double 6' doors and plate ends, all
10' IH.

Can anyone cast any light on the why and wherefores of these cars? Was
it a customer requirement or just eveloution? Any help will be
appreciated.

Bill McCoy
Jax






Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Illinois Central Quad Hoppers

rwitt_2000 <rmwitt@...>
 

Ray Breyer wrote in reply:
Did the Illinois Central operate any 40' quad hoppers during the
steam era? If so, what were their numbers, capacities, date of
introduction etc?

Yep; lots of them. I have the following data on IC triples:

Diagram, 80000-80299 series cars, built 1927.
Diagram, 81000-81744 series cars, built 1929.
A lettering recently was offered on ebay for the 1929 series triple
hoppers. [Ebay item #6563374989]

Diagram, 81734-81739 series cars, built 1930 (actually quad hoppers)
Diagram, 81790-81799 series cars, built 1947 (originally Peabody
Coal, bought by IC in 1957)
Builder's photo, 212799, new 11-27
In service photo, 82351, built 5-33 1950 ORER listing, 75000-78959,
80000-80298 and 81000-81744 series cars, all 41' IL.

What is the best starting point for a model?
Probably the Stewart or new Accurail triple offset hopper.
The AAR triple may be suitable for some, but not for the "classic" or
'signature" IC hopper. The diagram illustrated seems reasonably
accurate and correctly shows that the IC used the "hat section"
external bracing later termed the "AAR alternate standard" for the
construction of their off-set side hoppers. In the time period of the
late 1920s, this was the ARA standard construction for quads and was
used on the B&O fleet of W-2 quad hoppers amongst others and this
topic was covered in vol. 5 issue of the RPC. The IC consistantly
designed and built hoppers that used the "stepped" rather than
"tapered" end panels to begin the off-set. I have photos of cars
rebuilt as taller and higher capacity cars in the 1960s that still
used this method of construction.

This type of construction is modeled better with the former
MDC/Roundhouse off-set side triple hoppers. It is not a very good
model, but can serve as a standin. As others have done in the past
one could use pieces from the various cast plastic hopper models
including the Athearn quad to create a correct master and then cast
the sides and ends. I am not sure whose model could serve as an
acceptable "core" body.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Bob Witt


Re: Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Ray Breyer <rbreyer@...>
 

Tim,

There's a copy of the class diagram on the Fallen Flags site, and a photo on
the NEB&W site.

I think that with a little work, the Walthers car might serve as a stand-in
for these IC hoppers. But with the IC having several thousand conventional
twin hoppers, how often would these 400 cars really show up?

Ray Breyer

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Gilbert
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 7:53 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Richard White wrote:

There is a guy offering these for $7.95 on e-bay.
Is it suitable for the steam era?
Is the Illinois Central version authentic?
The April 1949 ORER listed 397 IC hoppers in the #73600-73999 series
which had two bays, had inside lengths of 34' 2", cubic capacity of
2,256 feet and 50-ton trucks. The series was described as "Hopper,
Corten Steel" - that steel I believe was a Pullman-Standard proprietary
product. Now how well Walthers model replicates this series is the
question - I do not have a photo of a "real" IC hopper in the
#73600-73999 series to compare - Walthers model has the #73674 car number.

Tim Gilbert







Yahoo! Groups Links














Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Garth Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Tim,

Cor-Ten (TM) steel is a name for certain products developed by U.S. Steel. It was used by Pullman and some other companies for freight car side sheets for its high strength to weight ratio and its corrosion resistence.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Tim Gilbert wrote:

The April 1949 ORER listed 397 IC hoppers in the #73600-73999 series

which had two bays, had inside lengths of 34' 2", cubic capacity of 2,256 feet and 50-ton trucks. The series was described as "Hopper, Corten Steel" - that steel I believe was a Pullman-Standard proprietary product . . . .
Tim Gilbert


Re: Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Ray Breyer <rbreyer@...>
 

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Gilbert
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 7:53 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Richard White wrote:

There is a guy offering these for $7.95 on e-bay.
Is it suitable for the steam era?
Is the Illinois Central version authentic?
The April 1949 ORER listed 397 IC hoppers in the #73600-73999 series
which had two bays, had inside lengths of 34' 2", cubic capacity of
2,256 feet and 50-ton trucks. The series was described as "Hopper,
Corten Steel" - that steel I believe was a Pullman-Standard proprietary
product. Now how well Walthers model replicates this series is the
question - I do not have a photo of a "real" IC hopper in the
#73600-73999 series to compare - Walthers model has the #73674 car number.

Tim Gilbert







Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Richard White wrote:

There is a guy offering these for $7.95 on e-bay.
Is it suitable for the steam era?
Is the Illinois Central version authentic?
The April 1949 ORER listed 397 IC hoppers in the #73600-73999 series which had two bays, had inside lengths of 34' 2", cubic capacity of 2,256 feet and 50-ton trucks. The series was described as "Hopper, Corten Steel" - that steel I believe was a Pullman-Standard proprietary product. Now how well Walthers model replicates this series is the question - I do not have a photo of a "real" IC hopper in the #73600-73999 series to compare - Walthers model has the #73674 car number.

Tim Gilbert


Re: Sant Fe Dry Ice Reefers

Bruce Smith <smithbf@...>
 

On Oct 5, 2005, at 9:52 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:



Gerald, I'm not aware of any other railroads that owned dry ice cars,
but there were several private owners: Mathieson, Liquid Carbonic
Corp., Merchants Despatch (DCIX), and perhaps others that don't come
readily to mind. All three had cars custom-built for this service, not
converted from conventional reefers as in the case of the Santa Fe
Rr-20 class.
At least one ex PRR R7 reefer (X23 style body) converted to dry ice service and I believe it was owned or leased by Mathieson. Hopefully, Al Westerfield will have the R7 for us someday soon <VBG>.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0


Walthers 34' PS 3 Coal Hopper

Richard White
 

There is a guy offering these for $7.95 on e-bay.
Is it suitable for the steam era?
Is the Illinois Central version authentic?
Thank you for your help
Richard White



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.9/118 - Release Date: 03/10/05


SOUTHERN War Emergency hoppers

matt
 

Hi there,

Does anybody know when the SOUTHERN Ry stopped using their War
Emergency Hoppers?

thanks for all your help

MATT


Re: Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

Scott Nattrass <scott@...>
 


Re: Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

Scott Nattrass <scott@...>
 

If the Sergeant couplers can be uncoupled by a magnetic wand, would it be possible to have some sort of electromagnet operated uncoupler - so you could achieve the same effects as the Kadee?

Scott Nattrass


[Fwd: Re: STMFC]

Scott Nattrass <scott@...>
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: STMFC
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 05:44:06 -0600
From: Scott Nattrass <scott@cheerservices.com>
To: Rhbale@aol.com
References: <d7.2ed216b2.3075fe10@aol.com>



Rhbale@aol.com wrote:

One of the standards on this list is that you sign your name. I've
been following the coupler comments closely but haven't a clue who
scott@cheerservices is.

Dick Bale
Sorry -

Scott Nattrass
Denver, CO


S Scale PRR F39

Bill Lane <billlane@...>
 

Hi All,

Here is my recently completed S Scale PRR F39 flat
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billlane/S_Scale_F39.jpg on my 20' long yard
module http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billlane/S_Scale_Yard_Module.jpg this
past weekend. It is a pewter kit offered by Bill's Trains Shop.
http://www.btsrr.com My friend Gus Minardi assembled the F39 and I finished
it.

Thank You,
Bill Lane

Modeling the Mighty Pennsy in S Scale in 1957

See my finished models at:
http://www.lanestrains.com

Importing a Brass S Scale PRR X29 & G26
http://www.pennsysmodels.com

ALL of the production X29 have arrived as of 6-30-05

***Join the PRR T&HS***
The other members are not ALL like me!
http://www.prrths.com


Re: NMRA Standards, conventions, et al

Bob Chaparro <thecitrusbelt@...>
 

Everyone has, and certainly is entitled to, his or her opinion. My
opinion is I enjoyed the tone of this group more when the only bashing
I read about was kit-bashing.

Bob Chaparro
Mission Viejo, CA


Re: UP freight car colours

Richard White
 

Dear Tim, Garth and Andy,
Thank you for your responses on yellow UP Freight cars.
Apart from the BI-50-3 class insulated box cars and Daylight Livestock/Livestock Despatch service, what other cars were painted yellow?
In particular, were any older cars repainted yellow and, if so, which ones and when did it happen?
Thank you and regards
Richard White

----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.9/118 - Release Date: 03/10/05


Re: Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

Jared Harper <harper-brown@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Sperandeo" <asperandeo@m...> wrote:

Sergent couplers are interesting, but like others here I'd like to
see them proven on an operating layout. There's also the fact that they
require reaching into the scene to uncouple, which is avoidable with
Kadee couplers and magnetic uncouplers. I know "everybody" is used to
reaching in to uncouple, but I'd like to not be used to it. And if I
may stray off freight cars for a moment, I don't see how Sergent
couplers can be uncoupled under the diaphragms of close-coupled
passenger cars.

How are Sergent couplers going to be proven on an operating layout if
operating modelers don't buy them? If you like the concept of a scale
coupler without unsightly uncoupling pins then you need to support
Frank Sergent and his efforts. As I understand it there is a cadre of
Kadee users that clip off the uncoupling pin and use some sort
of "pick" for uncoupling which requires reaching into the scene to
uncouple. How do they handle passenger car uncoupling? As for
uncoupling Sergent couplers on passenger cars with diaphrams I think it
can be done using the Sergent wand magnent. It is quite small in
diameter and will probably fit between the bottom of a diaphram and the
top of the coupler. Frank Sergent is making an effort to constantly
improve his product. He is responsive to comments and suggestions and
does intend to eventually develop a version with scale draft gear when
he recoups costs of his initial tooling. His initial offerings were an
effort develop a product that could be easily installed on the majority
of freight car offerings now available.

Jared Harper
Athens, GA


Re: Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

Jared Harper <harper-brown@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Wider" <pwider@s...> wrote:
I have several questions concerning these good-looking couplers:

1. Has anyone bought them in bulk and used them for an extended
period of time on an
operating layout with grades in trains having at least 30 cars?
2. Do they operate reliably over these grades with the associated
slack action, unavoidable
jolts, and with pusher locomotives?
3. Will they operate reliably between powered (MU'd) locomotives?
4. Do they stay assembled, that is, does the ACC'd bond remain
sound?
5. Apparently, they have to be filed down to fit a scale draft gear
box. Has anyone actually
done this?
6. They are sold in batches of 5 with no draft gear box. What the
heck????
7. I will need hundreds of the darn things as I convert over. Will
this company still be in
business 5 years from now?
I hope to be answering some of these questions fairly soon. Later
this month I am planning to order a bunch of these couplers to equip
my models. Sergent probably can be considered a cottage industry at
this point in time, but Kadee probably was when they started.
Sergent certainly won't get beyond the cottage industry stage if
modelers don't by them and try them. The concept seems good as does
the engineering so I am going to take the plunge.

Jared Harper
Athens, GA

134921 - 134940 of 181087