Date   
Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Eric Hansmann
 

The original is available to download in several sizes through the Library of Congress website at this link.

https://www.loc.gov/item/2017807305/

 

Nearly all of the Shorpy images are in the Library of Congress holdings.

 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 

 

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Paul Woods
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 1:24 PM
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

 

Hi Folks

If you encounter a Shorpy preview like this, all you have to do is copy and paste the link into your web browser, then delete the '.preview' part from the link before hitting enter; this will send you to the high-res version instead.

Regards
Paul

 

 

 

---- On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:14:22 +1200 Jim Betz <jimbetz@...> wrote ----

 

  ... just noticed that you will have to go to the Shorpy site to get the
full details I've posted questions about ... the attached version is
some kind of 'preview' that doesn't expand when clicked on from
this group ... sorry.
                                                                     - Jim B.

 

 

 

 

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Jim,

I have never heard of any sort of device to make cars rock, though some do due to inexpert assembly via loose truck screws.

There was a device that made cars coast when kicked loose by a switcher available about 30 years ago. It essentially a special underframe/floor with a large flywheel with a rubber band to a sheave on one of the car axles, and I believe developed by John Allen. I had a couple of these and they didn't work very well; the drag in a train was considerable, there was reduced turning radius for the truck, and control in those days usually wasn't fine enough for a switcher to properly kick the car. Eventually these underframes went away with my Athearn blue box cars.

On one of my portable layouts I had a spur that was sunk into the baseboard so the ties were nearly covered in dirt and a lot of Woodland Scenics foam. I had pounded on the track a bit with a hammer to make the rails uneven (code 70 Lambert track), and my cars did sway somewhat. I never had any derailment problems. It was an interesting experiment, and sinking the track is something I plan for my next layout. One spur will be sunk so the rails are embedded in street paving with cobbles or stone setts, and the other will essentially be in dirt as the track goes into a small iron works yard. I plan to use a piece of Lambert guard rail flex track for these. I'm not going to bang on the rails though.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 9/15/2019 1:12 PM, Jim Betz wrote:
Hi,

  Recent post to another group

  https://www.shorpy.com/files/images/SHORPY-8c15269a.preview.jpg

brings up the question of "how does one achieve the variety of the roof details
that is evident in this picture?" ... as in are there any products out there that
provide the minor variations such as the roof walks (both how wide the boards
are and the fact that many boards are not straight/true).  Another detail is the
way the L-grabs have verticals that are 'truly vertical' at the corner.  Etc., etc.
etc.  
  On the question of the width of the running boards - on the first -full- car you
can just make out the "N. P." ... so I'm wondering if different RRs had different
specs for their running boards?  Or is that tied to the mfgr of the car(s)? (Note
that the 2 cars on either side of the 1st full car have narrower boards.)

  Also note that the string of cars shows that almost every other car is canted
a different direction (left/right) ... which indicates that the cars were rocking
and rolling their way into that curve.  I've -never- seen a layout that achieves
this particular effect ... that didn't also have a lot of "layout induced derailments".
What seems to be needed to be done to produce this would be very small
height shims one one side and then the other ... say about a car length or
so for each direction.  Yes?  Have you ever seen this produced in a way
that makes the cars rock back and forth - only slightly but enough so if you
look for it you notice it?
                                                      - Jim B. in Burlington, Wa.
               

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Dennis Storzek
 

On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 12:15 PM, Garth Groff wrote:
Jim,

I have never heard of any sort of device to make cars rock, though some do due to inexpert assembly via loose truck screws.
The big problem with rocking model cars is that physics doesn't scale. Prototype cars rock at a natural frequency of maybe once or twice a minute, guessing here, but it's a slow ponderous motion. Model car with loose truck screws jitter at a frequency of maybe once or twice a SECOND, which looks maniac, not ponderous at all. the effect is just nervous jitters.

Dennis Storzek

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Rufus Cone
 

Two points

The roof on the mentioned car does not have the expected NP features (roof not curved and cast fittings clamping the panel joints are absent at the edges).  From the LOC tif version of the image, I do not "see" the NP initials myself, even after adjustment.  Perhaps the N is the second letter in the reporting mark - suggesting perhaps GN, given the location of the photograph.

To find the Library of Congress version of a Shorpy photo such as this, copy the numerical portion of the Shorpy link 8c15269a into your search engine.  With Google it is the first item to come up.

https://www.shorpy.com/files/images/SHORPY-8c15269a.preview.jpg

...- on the first -full- car you
can just make out the "N. P." ...
--

Rufus Cone
Bozeman, MT

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Bob Webber
 

I would take note of age, car owner, car outline. The car with the narrower running boards is also a few inches narrower than the others...when you mix 36', 40' 50' etc. in the same train, when you have varying degrees of car widths too due either construction era or home road (look at a X29 vs the same era Western car), when the older a car is, the drier (usually) the boards get, the more "character" is evinced.

The real issue is though not only does the physics not scale as Dennis noted, but the boards width and warping isn't apt to scale (as much). Looking at the boards, some are warping one way, other another - one reason the drawings show specific grain patterns for specific boards in specific places/ The drawings don't just show the base construct, but there is far more to them - the scrap diagrams and the wood grains are critical in learning why a car was built in a specific way - and why and how they age. This is not unlike determining crown and laying the wood - or instilling a crown (by saw or cast) such that the load bears "on top of" the crown.

Most running boards on HO models are one piece - or three. Rarely do people make the effort of actually using three pieces of wood - in the proper sequence and grain pattern . If you are going to speak of variety in terms of the roof though, that's the granularity you are going to have to get to. Note that if you do as some of us did 40 years ago - scribing then shaving the inside of the "boards" to duplicate this (in our heads, anyway) - you end up with ...shaved plastic looking like ...nothing natural.

If you look at the photo, the 2d, 5th & 7th cars are all narrower - and have narrower running boards. When built, they were likely in proportion and within the standards. As cars got wider, the boards got wider. The saddles got wider - think the opposite of airline seat evolution. Too...check out the 7th & 8th cars - those appear to be much shorter, much narrower cars. The photo makes it look like that's 1 car - but check the brake staffs. So...you are looking at two sets of boards - not one that is widely varied. Looking at roofs is a fine thing - regardless. But in context it may make more sense.

At 12:12 PM 9/15/2019, you wrote:
Hi,

Recent post to another group

<https://www.shorpy.com/files/images/SHORPY-8c15269a.preview.jpg>https://www.shorpy.com/files/images/SHORPY-8c15269a.preview.jpg

On the question of the width of the running boards - on the first -full- car you
can just make out the "N. P." ... so I'm wondering if different RRs had different
specs for their running boards? Or is that tied to the mfgr of the car(s)? (Note
that the 2 cars on either side of the 1st full car have narrower boards.)

----------
Bob Webber

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

spsalso
 

The car two cars back is likely NP, account of the curved roof.

The car between has an interesting roof.  Hutchins dry lading, perhaps?

The first and second  plank (from the left) on the foreground car have a similar knot arrangement, implying they were adjacent cuts from the log.  FWIW.



Ed

Edward Sutorik

Re: Ratios

Jason Kliewer
 

I've transcribed 10,000 car movements from 1960's train list for the Chicago Great Western and the home road cars only made up 10% of the total.

Along with that, in the top 10 were Canadian Pacific and Canadian National.

Jason Kliewer

Re: Ratios

Brian Carlson
 

The G-N or N-G data really only works up to the mid 1950s. This is well stated in the analyses done by Tim and Dave.  Once you get later things changed, piggyback, specialized boxcars, specific service, older cars on the books but stored all over the place (looking at you Pennsy), etc. 

Brian J. Carlson 

On Sep 15, 2019, at 5:53 PM, Jason Kliewer <wcfn100@...> wrote:

I've transcribed 10,000 car movements from 1960's train list for the Chicago Great Western and the home road cars only made up 10% of the total.

Along with that, in the top 10 were Canadian Pacific and Canadian National.

Jason Kliewer

Re: Ratios

Tony Thompson
 

Jason Kliewer wrote:

I've transcribed 10,000 car movements from 1960's train list for the Chicago Great Western and the home road cars only made up 10% of the total.

Along with that, in the top 10 were Canadian Pacific and Canadian National.

     One factor to consider in evaluating any road is what their proportion was, of originating vs. terminating traffic. One example is the BAR, which originated far more traffic than it received, fully 85 percent of all traffic was originated. This meant that they had to own a big car fleet to serve their shippers.
     A bridge route like the UP was almost the opposite.
     I discussed a Car Service article from the BAR as a part of one of my blog posts a couple of weeks ago, and provided a link to the BAR employee magazine about this. If you're interested, here is a link.


Tony Thompson



Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

David Soderblom
 

Exquisite, isn’t it?  All those directions in the boards and even different textures.  That’s why we model those freight cars, so that even a fairly casual viewer can see distinctive differences.  It really shouldn’t require advanced study to appreciate not-at-all-subtle distinctions between these cars, and I don't just mean the livery and heralds.

Even so, there’s pretty much height uniformity here.  Some years back in MM I remember the editor pointing out the very noticeable height differences within a post-WWII consist.  That greatly diminished with time, as all approached 10-6 IH.



David Soderblom,
Baltimore MD USA





Re: Ratios

Tim O'Connor
 

Jason

I think at least SOME of Tim Gilbert's data was not from train lists, but from "cars on hand"
data - some railroads published this kind of data e.g. Great Northern annual reports. A railroad
might have a good supply of home road cars "on hand" that were just waiting for assignments, or
waiting for repairs. The PRR was famous for having tens of thousands of bad ordered cars on line
just being held for repairs, or retirement. I've seen railroad yard photos that shows scads of
home road cars of all kinds coupled together in long lines...

A great type of data is to know percentages of (1a) originated loads that terminate online (1b)
that terminate offline and (2a) received loads that terminate online or (2b) are interchanged to
other roads. Knowing AAR rules etc, one can make intelligent guesses about model consists that
represent these traffic flows.

Tim




On 9/15/2019 5:53 PM, Jason Kliewer wrote:
I've transcribed 10,000 car movements from 1960's train list for the Chicago Great Western and the home road cars only made up 10% of the total.

Along with that, in the top 10 were Canadian Pacific and Canadian National.

Jason Kliewer

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Jim Betz
 

Garth,
  I was thinking more of modifications to the track than to the cars ... Jim

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Jim Betz
 

Ed,
  That car you are saying is NP has a metal roof - if I'm seeing it right. - Jim

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Jim Betz
 

Rufus,
  You may be right - but in one version of the photo that I viewed I felt
that I was seeing both N and P and that they were properly spaced.  - Jim
Not saying I'm right and you are wrong.

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Jim Betz
 

Hi,

  So a -major- part of my question is/was "is there a way to get the running 
boards of our models to look like these?".  I'm thinking that maybe you
start by eliminating the plastic version, use actual wood that has been
properly dimensioned (probably have to sand to correct thickness?), and
then 'process' it to warp it like these have warped.  Might have to start
with stock pieces that are much longer than scale, get them to 'wiggle'
then cut to length.  Finally - mix them up so you don't get a lot of boards
that were out of the same piece on the same car.
  Doing the running board supports between the car top and the boards
will be a major PITA (meaning lots of work) since, at least as far as I
know, there aren't any good options for those in either wood or plastic.
Perhaps this is a candidate for 3D printing?
                                                                                  - Jim in Burlington

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Jim Betz
 


  ... suggestions for my word "process" in the prior?

  I'm speculating that maybe wetting the wood and then sandwiching
it between two pieces of glass to eliminate vertical warping ...

  Ideas for wetting other than water or "wet water"?
                                                                                      - Jim

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

Robert kirkham
 

Hi Jim – Tichy makes running board supports.  Part 3081.

 

Rob Kirkham

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jim Betz
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 4:19 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

 

Hi,

  So a -major- part of my question is/was "is there a way to get the running 
boards of our models to look like these?".  I'm thinking that maybe you
start by eliminating the plastic version, use actual wood that has been
properly dimensioned (probably have to sand to correct thickness?), and
then 'process' it to warp it like these have warped.  Might have to start
with stock pieces that are much longer than scale, get them to 'wiggle'
then cut to length.  Finally - mix them up so you don't get a lot of boards
that were out of the same piece on the same car.
  Doing the running board supports between the car top and the boards
will be a major PITA (meaning lots of work) since, at least as far as I
know, there aren't any good options for those in either wood or plastic.
Perhaps this is a candidate for 3D printing?
                                                                                  - Jim in Burlington

Re: Qs Generated by a Shorpy Photo ...

steve_wintner
 

I would hesitate to overdo it. I guess I would attempt building one up using styrene, cut into individual boards. My own attempts at that would inherently  have a bit of wiggle and warpage. Add a bit of paint, one board weathered more than it's neighbor, etc. See how that worked, then give it another shot.

Have fun
Steve


Re: Ratios

Donald B. Valentine
 

Randy Hamill wrote:

"Although I generally agree with the Gilbert-Nelson approach, along with Bruce Smith’s percentages, they are very dependent upon the road you model. 

Bruce models the PRR, so 75% home road hoppers on any coal hauling road makes sense. But I model the NH that has a modest fleet of hoppers of less than 1,000, with little originating traffic that would send them offline. So home road hoppers make up a very small part of my fleet.

Understanding your road’s traffic is very important. For example, as much as 60% of the coal entering CT in my era was by water. That appears to have been Pocahontas and other bituminous coming through Baltimore, and I think was the primary source of coal loaded in NH hoppers to be distributed to industry, but particularly the railroad’s facilities. On the other hand, anthracite came primarily via Maybrook, unless you were in the vicinity of NYC, in which case it came mostly by float via Jersey City and Greenville. So I go with the anthracite hoppers as a mix of 75% home road of their loading point.

So the mix of hoppers is very dependent on whether you’re modeling a coal road or not, I think.

Gondolas and flats are the same, and since the NH was heavily involved in manufacturing, gondolas were also predominantly foreign. Like the hoppers, I think gondolas and flats are far more dependent on the home road of the loading point. 

I also think we often have too little variety (and too few) “rare” cars. I have two pictures, from different days, with ATSF Ga-8 gons, and these weren’t photographed because of their rarity, they just happened to be on those trains. Likewise the photos of the Litchfield & Madison gondola in New Britain. Numerous pictures of C&I hoppers, etc.

I’m not saying those happen every day, but based on those and many, many other photos that have “rare” cars (often in the background) show that there’s a wider variety than many allow. I think we often make the mistake of not having enough different “rare” cars to mix in, making the couple of rare cars that are owned very common on our layouts."

   

Hi Randy and all,

    I could not agree more with the last nine words of your first sentence, "they are very dependent upon the road you model".
The rest of what u have presented echos my own experience as well. I'm not going to suggest that Bruce's percentages are
incorrect but they in no way reflect traffic patterns of the roads in Northern New England. The key point that is borne out in hundreds of action photos of trains in Northern New England is that as much as 75 to 80% of the cars found in trains within the region were all boxcars! That seems to be quite different than the averages that have been suggested by Bruce and others. This is particularly true in the 1945 to 1950 period that I model. Using the Central Vermont as an example, the bulk of the traffic arriving in Italy Yard in St. Albans, Vermont, not 20 miles south of the Canadian border was brought there by parent Canadian National in trains that originated in the American mid-west, may not have been switched since leaving Chicago if originating on the Grand Trunk Western and was often picked up with CV #700 class 2-10-4's operating as far west as Brockville, Ontario and coming to St. Albans via the former Canada Atlantic line from Coteau Jct. and through Valleyfield, PQ to by-pass Montreal. Needless to state much of this was differential traffic taking advantage of the lower freight rates this provided. Much of it was also grain from both the American West and the Canadian West. Most of theat from the Canadian West was export grain while muchof the from the American midwest would be processed in transit under that rating system in grain mills in Northern New England for shipment further south in 100 lb. bags in boxcars that could be headed home that way or in boxcars frm whichever road the grain was processed on. Carloads of Canadian lumber for on line delivery or overhead traffic must also be considered. Parts for the Ford Assembly Plant formerly located in Somerville, Mass. also cam in boxcars excepet for the framws , which usually came in DT&I gons via the Canadian Pacific all the way from Windsor, Ontario until they arrived on the B&M at Wells River, VT. The traffic coming down the Grand Trunk in this period was much the same as a fair amount of grain was still going out through Portland, Maine in this era. Any Canadian made paper was also coming in boxcars.The hopper cars we saw were all coming up form the south and the further north one traveled the few of them were seen. Here to coal cold be seen coming north in B&O cars, the most plentiful and the cars most coal for the CV arrived in. Anthracite was largely found in D&H, Erie, Lackawanna or Reading cars. Pennsy and NYC cars were fairly common and a few C&O and N&W cars could be seen. Most coal from the C&O and N&W was tide coal that arrived at New England ports and was delivered in home road hoppers. Even the little Rutland handled much of the coal received from the NYC at Norwood, NY in this manner by transfering it to home road cars through the use of it large coal trestle at the side of its yard in ALburgh, VT. Tank cars in those years were not as common as hoppers but almost all gasoline and oil arrived in 8,000 and 10,000 gal. tank cars, again with fewer being seen the further north one went. With this traffic basis my car fleet does not begin to meet what Bruce has suggested for percentages and I don't think anything has been missed!

Cordially, Don Valentine

Re: Ratios

Donald B. Valentine
 

It was not just the reefer fleet that the BAR needed only for the potato harvest, it was also motive power. Until the BAR worked a deal with the Pennsy that sent BAR power to the Pennsy during the summer ore hauling season and PRR power to the BAR for the potato harvest it was not uncommon to see New Haven DL-109's on the BAR for the potato rush. I'm not certain how many seasons the New Haven power was used but it seems to have been about the only time Alco diesel power was seen on the BAR, which had been a loyal Alco customer in steam days.

Cordially, Don Valentine