Topics

truck naming


Rob Kirkham <rdkirkham@...>
 

truck namingI am looking over a set of CC&F drawings for a 46 foot flat car built for CPR in 1929, series 300000-300499, and planning to model it. The trucks specifications had interesting information (to me at least) that left me wondering about the best model available. Then as I read more, something struck my funny bone.
The bits and pieces name several well known builders, and so I wonder where do we modellers pick out the truck name? The side frames of course - in which case this is a Dalman two-level type, right? But is that how it would be described in prototype practice? Something about this list reminds me of the old Johnny Cash song about a '56, '57, '58, '59 Cadillac. I might be tempted (not really) to call it an "ARA Barber Standard Car Truck Co. Dalman CC&F Co. Creco Dominion Brake Shoe Co. Asco Stucki" truck - though it wouldn't mean much to anyone. I've seen Barber and Dalman and Standard Car Truck adds, but this particular combination is hard to imagine. Unfortuneeately, the trucks in the car photo I have are so hidden in shadow as to offer little more than my observation of at least four visible springs.

In the section titled Specialties (Truck) it contains the following (edited) list:

a.. Axles - ARA standard with 5.5" x 10" journals
b.. Barber Lateral Motion Device - Standard Car Truck Co's.
c.. Bolsters - Dalman two-level type with integral centre plate
d.. Bottom Connection - forged type
e.. Brake Beams - Simplex ARA No.2 plus. CC&F Co's drawing No. W-317. Supported by Creco four-point suspension.
f.. Brake Shoes - Dominion Brake Shoe Co. Pattern C-40
g.. Centre Plate - cast integral with bolster
h.. Journal Bearings - ARA standard Bronze for 5.5" x 10" journals
i.. Journal Bearing Wedges - ARA standard drop-forged for 5.5" x 10" journals
j.. Journal Boxes - cast integral with side frame
k.. Journal Box Lids - ARA Asco torsion self-fitting type
l.. Side Bearings - Stucki roller type. Pattern No. 5007
m.. Springs - To CC&F Co's. drawings Nos.235-11 and 235-30
n.. Spring Plank - 7/16" O.H. Steel Plate
o.. Truck Frames - Dalman two-level type
p.. Wheels - ARA standard 750 lbs. 33" diameter. Chilled tread. Pattern No. W-97.

Thanks for any modeling direction you can provide.
Robert Kirkham


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Rob Kirkham wrote:
. . . I wonder where do we modellers pick out the truck name? The side frames of course - in which case this is a Dalman two-level type, right? But is that how it would be described in prototype practice?
In the section titled Specialties (Truck) it contains the following (edited) list:

a.. Axles - ARA standard with 5.5" x 10" journals
b.. Barber Lateral Motion Device - Standard Car Truck Co's.
o.. Truck Frames - Dalman two-level type
Rob, it is was common to specify a truck DESIGN (such as Dalman two-level) and then those who could produce that design of truck arrangement under license from Dalman could bid to supply the sideframes (what we usually care about as modelers, as it dominates appearance). It sounds in this case like the sideframes probably came from SCTCo, who in turn add the Barber device.
I have looked at car orders for SP in which something like the A-3 truck was specified (a creation of ASF) and then the sideframes, all A-3 type, were supplied by SIX different manufactures in an order for hundreds of cars, which might not even include ASF if they didn't bid low enough. So in this case calling them "two-level Dalman" tells you the overall sideframe appearance and spring arrangement, but does NOT tell you the exact sideframe contour unless all came from SCTCo.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Richard Hendrickson
 

As Tony Thompson has correctly observed, all of the widely used truck designs were licensed by the patent holders to other truck manufacturers, so knowing who made the side frames, bolsters, etc. tells you nothing about the design of the truck. In the example cited by Ron Kirkham, the trucks were Dalman Two-Level with Barber lateral motion devices between the springs and bolsters.

Richard Hendrickson


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
. . . knowing who made the side frames, bolsters, etc.
tells you nothing about the design of the truck. In the example cited
by Ron Kirkham, the trucks were Dalman Two-Level with Barber lateral
motion devices between the springs and bolsters.
Exactly. But note the converse: knowing it's a Barber-stabilized truck, for example, does NOT tell you what the sideframe outline or contour will be, as each manufacturer had their own refinements. A Barber truck from National did not have the same exact sideframe as one from ASF, for example.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Rob Kirkham <rdkirkham@...>
 

Tony and Richard, thanks for these replies - I appreciate learning that things aren't as simple or straightforward as they once seemed. I take it then the old adage about using a photo is pretty much the starting point for picking/modelling a truck - the specs alone just won't do?

Rob Kirkham,


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Rob Kirkham wrote:
Tony and Richard, thanks for these replies - I appreciate learning that
things aren't as simple or straightforward as they once seemed. I take it
then the old adage about using a photo is pretty much the starting point for
picking/modelling a truck - the specs alone just won't do?
I can't speak for Richard, but I'd say you would prefer to have both. The photo is primary, because sideframe shapes did vary with time as well as with manufacturer, and you can always find the closest match possible in the limited universe of model trucks. "Closest," that is, for a given set of design aspects, such as spring planks, bolster snubbers, etc. The specs do help too but only to narrow down what you are looking at in the models.
I once thought I could collect truck drawings and info from the Cycs and have a complete listing of what every mfgr. made. Wrong. They by no means always put all the product into a particular Cyc. And it isn't hard to find car photos with trucks which don't exactly match anything in a Cyc. Richard's article in RP CYC is a landmark in setting a framework for this topic, but there are many, many details he simply couldn't cover, as I'm sure he will be quick to say.

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@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Sep 1, 2005, at 9:15 PM, Anthony Thompson wrote:

Rob Kirkham wrote:
Tony and Richard, thanks for these replies - I appreciate learning that
things aren't as simple or straightforward as they once seemed. I
take it
then the old adage about using a photo is pretty much the starting
point for
picking/modelling a truck - the specs alone just won't do?
I can't speak for Richard, but I'd say you would prefer to have
both. The photo is primary, because sideframe shapes did vary with time
as well as with manufacturer, and you can always find the closest match
possible in the limited universe of model trucks. "Closest," that is,
for a given set of design aspects, such as spring planks, bolster
snubbers, etc. The specs do help too but only to narrow down what you
are looking at in the models.
I once thought I could collect truck drawings and info from the
Cycs and have a complete listing of what every mfgr. made. Wrong. They
by no means always put all the product into a particular Cyc. And it
isn't hard to find car photos with trucks which don't exactly match
anything in a Cyc. Richard's article in RP CYC is a landmark in setting
a framework for this topic, but there are many, many details he simply
couldn't cover, as I'm sure he will be quick to say.
All completely true, and clearly and concisely stated.

Richard Hendrickson