Date   

Re: Resin

fwj@...
 

--- In STMFC@y..., "westerfield" <westerfield@m...> wrote:



What with the sale at eHobbies and now this, I can expect some
pretty lean
sales for old kits for the foreseeable future. - Al Westerfield
Give us some more single piece shell kits and we might build more and
buy more. Considering the time saved, a higher price of $5.00 to
$7.00 per kit would be worth it.

On anther note: Do you think that professional model builder died
from inhaling too much paint and bonding agents?
Victor Baird


MKT quad hoppers

John Nehrich <nehrij@...>
 

I've posted a builder's photo of an M-K-T quad hopper at:
http://www.union.rpi.edu/railroad/images/rolling-stock/Kits/Athearn-hoppers.
html
which seems to show the car was painted box car red, but with black
rectangles behind the
lettered areas. Is this another example of "builder's gray" (i.e., done
just for the photo)? - John


Re: Mainline Cover Photo

billd@...
 

Bill,

No, I don't have a photo of these cars. I got my information
on these cars from Stan Schedwler of Coronado Scale Models
in Phoenix.

Bill Daniels

On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 11:41:43 EDT
Bill Kelly <wbkelly@juno.com> wrote:
Bill,
Sounds like you have a photo of the EP&SW cars, I have
heard of one in
_Locomotive Quarterly_ several years back. Are there
others out there?

Bill Kelly

Bill Daniels wrote:
snip<
...and noticed that the doors appear to have
three hinges on each side, which was the
PFE standard, and not the ex-EP&SW cars
(which had 4 hinges on each side).
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

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



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate (Off Topic)

billd@...
 

Ben,

My experience was a few years before you...early 70's in M
division onboard a Boomer (USS John Adams, SSBN 620).
Although I was only an enlisted Machinest's Mate I managed
to learn the finer points of steam plant operation (as well
as nuclear operations).

Your comments about the advantages as well as the
disadvantages of steam propulsion are right on target. It's
too bad that steam plants are so damn expensive to operate,
but that's the way it is. Having spent time in operations of
one, I can fully understand why it's so hard to get anyone
to do that sort of thing these days...it's just plain hard
work in a hot, dreary environment. That could be the reason
my engineering degrees are in the Civil field these days.
As they say, "been there, done that".

Being onboard the boats was similar to being on a
destroyer...small crews with a high level of morale
(usually!). The only problem was a decided lack of
view...it's kinda hard to see where you are when you have to
look through 3" of HY-80 hull, and are under several hundred
feet of water.

Bill Daniels

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 22:22:21 -0700
"Benjamin Hom" <bhom3@home.com> wrote:
A little off topic - feel free to hit delete key if you
don't want to read a
longish post on Naval Engineering:


"Hmmm...sounds like Mr. Hom has spent some time in
Uncle's Canoe Club :-)"

Eleven years on active duty, beginning right before the
Berlin Wall fell
(including five all-expense paid trips to the Middle
East), all of it as an
engineering officer (steam and gas turbine) on tin cans,
the last three as a
Chief Engineer.


"As I remember it, the Knox class cans were somewhat
unsat...they carried
1200 psi steam plants that were nothing but trouble, and
the the time the
Navy was rapidly turning them over to the various reserve
fleets (however, I
can't imagine a reserve crew having more luck than a
regular Navy
crew...but, then what does a bubblehead like me know???"

The factors that finally finished steam powered
destroyers in the US Navy is
somewhat analagous to what happened to steam on the
railroads. The plants
were very powerful (even now, it's a foolish commander
who decides to race a
gas turbine powered destroyer against an old
Gearing-class destroyer over
distances greater than five miles), and if kept well
maintained, were
reliable. The trouble with the 1200 psi plants (or for
that matter, any
type of engineering plant) came with age and deferred
maintenance, and high
pressure steam plants of any type required a lot of care
and feeding to keep
things running reliably. The ships were not successful
in as reserve ships
due to the amount of maintenance that still had to be
done by a crew that
was only manned 60% of fleet standard.

Additionally, the steam plants required watchteams twice
the size of a gas
turbine plant due to lack of automation and remote
monitoring capabilities,
and a large number of plant auxiliaries that had to be
operated and
monitored by watchstanders in the same space. With fewer
sailors staying
in, the Navy is really pushing system automation to try
to reduce crew size
(proposed crew size of DD 21 - 90).


"I did like the looks of these ships, however...that Mack
was rather
attractive (unlike more modern vessels). And when I was
familiar with them,
they were destroyers, and not Frigates...

The DE 1052 class ships were a great place for a junior
officer to learn the
trade of a destroyerman - you do many of the same things
as the more capable
ships, but the smaller crews force you become more
familiar with your job
faster, and much like submarines, allow you to get to
know the crew much
faster. The most unsat thing about the ships was that
they were obsolescent
before the first ship in the class was commissioned - the
design dated from
the 1950s, and the ships were too one-dimensional -
excellent ASW ships, but
very lacking in the other warfare areas, and totally
inadequate in command,
control, and communications systems. None of us had any
illusion of what
would happen if we had to escort convoys across the
Atlantic against the
Soviets if the Cold War turned hot.


"In fact, at the time I was familiar with them, the class
ship (DD 1052, USS
Knox) was stationed in Pearl, and carried an anti-sub
heli that was housed
in a small hanger back aft...with the legend "Knox
International Airport"
over the door."

I always made it a habit to make "USS ________ POWER AND
LIGHT COMPANY"
signs for my engine and generator rooms!


Ben Hom
Lieutenant Commander, US Naval Reserve




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



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate (Off Topic)

Benjamin Hom <bhom3@...>
 

A little off topic - feel free to hit delete key if you don't want to read a
longish post on Naval Engineering:


"Hmmm...sounds like Mr. Hom has spent some time in Uncle's Canoe Club :-)"

Eleven years on active duty, beginning right before the Berlin Wall fell
(including five all-expense paid trips to the Middle East), all of it as an
engineering officer (steam and gas turbine) on tin cans, the last three as a
Chief Engineer.


"As I remember it, the Knox class cans were somewhat unsat...they carried
1200 psi steam plants that were nothing but trouble, and the the time the
Navy was rapidly turning them over to the various reserve fleets (however, I
can't imagine a reserve crew having more luck than a regular Navy
crew...but, then what does a bubblehead like me know???"

The factors that finally finished steam powered destroyers in the US Navy is
somewhat analagous to what happened to steam on the railroads. The plants
were very powerful (even now, it's a foolish commander who decides to race a
gas turbine powered destroyer against an old Gearing-class destroyer over
distances greater than five miles), and if kept well maintained, were
reliable. The trouble with the 1200 psi plants (or for that matter, any
type of engineering plant) came with age and deferred maintenance, and high
pressure steam plants of any type required a lot of care and feeding to keep
things running reliably. The ships were not successful in as reserve ships
due to the amount of maintenance that still had to be done by a crew that
was only manned 60% of fleet standard.

Additionally, the steam plants required watchteams twice the size of a gas
turbine plant due to lack of automation and remote monitoring capabilities,
and a large number of plant auxiliaries that had to be operated and
monitored by watchstanders in the same space. With fewer sailors staying
in, the Navy is really pushing system automation to try to reduce crew size
(proposed crew size of DD 21 - 90).


"I did like the looks of these ships, however...that Mack was rather
attractive (unlike more modern vessels). And when I was familiar with them,
they were destroyers, and not Frigates...

The DE 1052 class ships were a great place for a junior officer to learn the
trade of a destroyerman - you do many of the same things as the more capable
ships, but the smaller crews force you become more familiar with your job
faster, and much like submarines, allow you to get to know the crew much
faster. The most unsat thing about the ships was that they were obsolescent
before the first ship in the class was commissioned - the design dated from
the 1950s, and the ships were too one-dimensional - excellent ASW ships, but
very lacking in the other warfare areas, and totally inadequate in command,
control, and communications systems. None of us had any illusion of what
would happen if we had to escort convoys across the Atlantic against the
Soviets if the Cold War turned hot.


"In fact, at the time I was familiar with them, the class ship (DD 1052, USS
Knox) was stationed in Pearl, and carried an anti-sub heli that was housed
in a small hanger back aft...with the legend "Knox International Airport"
over the door."

I always made it a habit to make "USS ________ POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY"
signs for my engine and generator rooms!


Ben Hom
Lieutenant Commander, US Naval Reserve


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate

billd@...
 

Hmmm...sounds like Mr. Hom has spent some time in Uncle's
Canoe Club :-)

As I remember it, the Knox class cans were somewhat
unsat...they carried 1200 psi steam plants that were nothing
but trouble, and the the time the Navy was rapidly turning
them over to the various reserve fleets (however, I can't
imagine a reserve crew having more luck than a regular Navy
crew...but, then what does a bubblehead like me know???

I did like the looks of these ships, however...that Mack was
rather attractive (unlike more modern vessels).
And when I was familiar with them, they were destroyers, and
not Frigates...

In fact, at the time I was familiar with them, the class
ship (DD 1052, USS Knox) was stationed in Pearl, and carried
an anti-sub heli that was housed in a small hanger back
aft...with the legend "Knox International Airport" over the
door.

Bill Daniels
Tucson, AZ

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 20:28:09 -0700
"Benjamin Hom" <bhom3@home.com> wrote:
Tim O'Connor wrote:

I believe some destroyer naval gun turrets were shipped
on flat cars.
Unfortunately, I can't recall where I acquired this
notion!


When I was stationed at Norfolk in 1990-1993, many KNOX
(FF 1052), CHARLES
F. ADAMS (DDG 2), and FARRAGUT (DDG 37) class frigates
and destroyers were
being decommissioned as newer (and much more capable)
Aegis cruisers and
destroyers joined the fleet. As part of the
decommissioning process, all
gun and missile mounts were removed from the ships and
shipped to Naval
Weapons Center, Crane, Indiana. I remember seeing 5
in/54 caliber Mark 42
gun mounts having the barrels removed, then being mounted
two to a flatcar
after they were craned off the ships. The opening left
on the ship was then
covered by a soft patch before the ship got towed away to
the inactive ship
facility after the decommissioning ceremony.


Ben Hom


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



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate

Benjamin Hom <bhom3@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

I believe some destroyer naval gun turrets were shipped on flat cars.
Unfortunately, I can't recall where I acquired this notion!


When I was stationed at Norfolk in 1990-1993, many KNOX (FF 1052), CHARLES
F. ADAMS (DDG 2), and FARRAGUT (DDG 37) class frigates and destroyers were
being decommissioned as newer (and much more capable) Aegis cruisers and
destroyers joined the fleet. As part of the decommissioning process, all
gun and missile mounts were removed from the ships and shipped to Naval
Weapons Center, Crane, Indiana. I remember seeing 5 in/54 caliber Mark 42
gun mounts having the barrels removed, then being mounted two to a flatcar
after they were craned off the ships. The opening left on the ship was then
covered by a soft patch before the ship got towed away to the inactive ship
facility after the decommissioning ceremony.


Ben Hom


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

This is the problem when you get unskilled people doing this sort
of thing. Of course, those aren't train parts at all. The upper bag, of
metal castings, is of life rafts and other ships fittings, and the lower
are naval gun turrets...geeeeeeez
I believe some destroyer naval gun turrets were shipped on flat cars.
Unfortunately, I can't recall where I acquired this notion!


Timothy O'Connor <timoconnor@mediaone.net>
Marlborough, Massachusetts


Re: Resin

Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

Does anyone know if Mr. Gronski built all the resin cars at Steamtown??
If so, there ought to be a plaque giving him credit for the work, which
is excellent.

Dave Nelson wrote

re: Mr Gronski's passing, I spoke with Vern at the Train Shop today (who
supplied Gronski w/ many Sunshine kits). I was told Mr. Gronski routinely
finished a resin car kit each day, 5 days a week. Had customers all over
the country, including museums. Vern also said Mr. Gronski had a very
substantial library.
Timothy O'Connor <timoconnor@mediaone.net>
Marlborough, Massachusetts


Re: Resin

Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

re: Mr Gronski's passing, I spoke with Vern at the Train Shop today (who
supplied Gronski w/ many Sunshine kits). I was told Mr. Gronski routinely
finished a resin car kit each day, 5 days a week. Had customers all over
the country, including museums. Vern also said Mr. Gronski had a very
substantial library.

Dave Nelson

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Miller [mailto:atsf@inow.com]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 7:51 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Resin


This is the reply I received from the seller of the resin kits.

"Greeting Jon,
Thank you for your inquiry. The answer to your question is, yes. These
were Mr. Robert Gronski's models. It is with regret that I am the one to
inform you, that Mr. Gronski passed away several months back. Mr. Thomas
Baldwin (owner of Baldwin's Book Barn) was a friend of Mr. Gronski's and
purchased most of Mr. Gronski's modeling items (unbuilt model kits, tools,
etc). Mr. Baldwin had great reverence for Mr. Gronski's artistic
skills and
his perfectionism in making his models. It is with much respect that we
play the role of providing a medium for his model's to be passed
on to other
enthusiasts.
Thank you.
Tacie Himelright
Baldwin's Book Barn"



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



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Re: Resin

westerfield <westerfield@...>
 

They're MINE MINE ALL MINE!!! Keepa you hands off!!! I deserve to get
Sunshine and Westerfield kits for 10 bucks!!
Hey, if I could get them for $10 and resell them at list, I'd buy them!

What with the sale at eHobbies and now this, I can expect some pretty lean
sales for old kits for the foreseeable future. - Al Westerfield


Re: Resin

westerfield <westerfield@...>
 

. One R. Gronski passed away on 1 Dec 2000. No recent benefit
address but the SSN was issued to a PA. resident. He was about 62.

Dave Nelson
Dave - You must be right. Thanks. - Al


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate

Bruce F Smith <smithbf@...>
 

On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Dave & Libby Nelson wrote:

Check out #1603339615
This is the problem when you get unskilled people doing this sort
of thing. Of course, those aren't train parts at all. The upper bag, of
metal castings, is of life rafts and other ships fittings, and the lower
are naval gun turrets...geeeeeeez,

Happy Bidding
Bruce


Re: UTLX Car Classifications

Richard Hendrickson
 

Tony Thompson wrote, responding to Shawn Beckert's inquiry about UTLX tank
car classes:

I'm intrigued that the ICC-103 tank was an X-3 and the (possible) 105 was
an X-5. That might mean that these classifications were based on the ICC
classes (remember that the ICC classes were essentially tank ratings and
said nothing about the underframe or general appearance). That would mean
there would only be X-4's if UTLX owned ICC 104 cars.
A shrewd, and correct, inference; UTLX X-4s were all ICC-104s (or insulated
ICC-103s, which amounted to the same thing), and X-5s were all ICC-105 high
pressure insulated cars for LPG loading.

....Whether they would
have classified the ARA Type I and Type II cars (preceding Type III which
became 103) as X-1 and X-2, I don't know.
There were no UTLX X-1 or X-2 class cars. But AFAIK all of their ARA I and
ARA II tank cars were UTLX-design Van Dyke cars (UTLX class V) or similar
cars with center sills (Class X).

Now about that ZX0 class. This might be a car of Type I or II (if there
were no X-1 or X-2 cars), or it may come from another ICC classification
such as 103-A or something else.
In fact, Class Z covered all cars of non-UTLX design, that is, various
UTL-owned cars built by GATC, AC&F, etc. to the builder's designs.
Apparently UTL added symbols to the Class Z designation to differentiate
the various cars that fell within this category, which would account for
the "XO," though I've never seen a key for those added symbols.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: An interesting lot from the Gronski estate

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

I saw that and wondered, and wondered! The wood looks like some kind of
jig for assembling the hopper cars but beyond that it's a great mystery. An
even greater mystery is that it has two bids already.

Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax DCC owner, Chief system
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


An interesting lot from the Gronski estate

Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Check out #1603339615

-----------------------------------
Dave Nelson


Re: Resin

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

This is the reply I received from the seller of the resin kits.

"Greeting Jon,
Thank you for your inquiry. The answer to your question is, yes. These
were Mr. Robert Gronski's models. It is with regret that I am the one to
inform you, that Mr. Gronski passed away several months back. Mr. Thomas
Baldwin (owner of Baldwin's Book Barn) was a friend of Mr. Gronski's and
purchased most of Mr. Gronski's modeling items (unbuilt model kits, tools,
etc). Mr. Baldwin had great reverence for Mr. Gronski's artistic skills and
his perfectionism in making his models. It is with much respect that we
play the role of providing a medium for his model's to be passed on to other
enthusiasts.
Thank you.
Tacie Himelright
Baldwin's Book Barn"


Re: Is this a model of a 70-ton plain bearing freight car truck?

Richard Hendrickson
 

No, it's a very crude model of an ASF A-3 (note the absence of a spring
plank and the protruding spring seat housing at the bottom of the side
frame). No earthly use to anyone, since we have a couple of really good
ASF A-3 trucks already.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: Bowser X31/X32

Benjamin Hom <bhom3@...>
 

Ben Hom wrote, regarding inaccuracies in Bowser X31 cars:
b) the CK reporting marks are correct on the 50 ft X32 and X33 kits, and c)
you live in Pennsylvania, for God's sake!


To which Tom Madden astutely observed:
So does Byron, but let's not hold it against God.


Kind of brings to mind some passages from Milton's Paradise Lost, doesn't
it?


Ben Hom


Re: Bowser X31/X32

tgmadden <tgmadden@...>
 

Ben Hom wrote, regarding inaccuracies in Bowser X31 cars:
b) the CK reporting marks are correct on the 50 ft X32 and X33 kits, and c)
you live in Pennsylvania, for God's sake!

So does Byron, but let's not hold it against God.

Tom M.

184321 - 184340 of 186164