Equipment registers


ajfergusonca <ajferguson@...>
 

I have a question that should have a simple answer. The equipment
registers are referred to as July 1958 for example. What was the
cutoff date for new data?
Allen Ferguson


Garth Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Allen,

The ORERs were issued quarterly. That said, a company might be very slow in reporting changes.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

ajfergusonca wrote:

I have a question that should have a simple answer. The equipment registers are referred to as July 1958 for example. What was the cutoff date for new data?
Allen Ferguson






Yahoo! Groups Links






Gregg Mahlkov <mahlkov@...>
 

Allen, Garth, and list,

Since I furnished entries to the ORER for 18 years, let me explain how it worked. First, for many years, it was a Tariff filed with the ICC, and as such required 30 days' notice from time of receipt at the ICC to effective date. It was issued quarterly, on January 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15, so it had to be in the hands of the Commission by December 15, March 15, June 15, and September 15. Since it took a month to set up the galleys and proofread it (as a tariff it could contain NO errors), the information had to be in the hands of the Tariff Publishing Agent at 15 W. 32nd Street, New York 1, New York, before November 15, February 15, May 15, and August 15. So basically, railroads and private car owners had about two or three weeks from the effective date of an issue to get the changes for the next to the publisher-agent.

Since this list is limited to discussions of pre-1960 cars, I won't go into the changes wrought by computers, UMLER, the demise of the ICC and that ugly, ugly, word, deprescription.

Gregg Mahlkov

----- Original Message -----
From: "Garth Groff" <ggg9y@virginia.edu>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Equipment registers


Allen,

The ORERs were issued quarterly. That said, a company might be very slow
in reporting changes.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

ajfergusonca wrote:

I have a question that should have a simple answer. The equipment
registers are referred to as July 1958 for example. What was the
cutoff date for new data?
Allen Ferguson







Yahoo! Groups Links










Yahoo! Groups Links







Ian Cranstone
 

On 1-Nov-05, at 2:48 PM, ajfergusonca wrote:

I have a question that should have a simple answer. The equipment
registers are referred to as July 1958 for example. What was the
cutoff date for new data?
There was a time when some of the large entries would provide an actual effective date for their roster (I believe the New York Central system did so), and I seem to recall that generally their effective date was about a month before the publication date of the issue. The shortlines and many private owners could go months or years between updates, especially if they had no equipment to report (or very small fleets).

Of course, at that point there was also an effort to include cars on order that were expected to arrive before the cover date of the issue as well.

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
lamontc@nakina.net
http://freightcars.nakina.net
http://siberians.nakina.net


Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Gregg Mahlkov wrote:


Since
it took a month to set up the galleys and proofread it (as a tariff
it could contain NO errors)....
There were errors. Not many, but >0. I can pull some out if you want
examples.

Dave Nelson


Gregg Mahlkov <mahlkov@...>
 

Dave,

Under the ICC rules, the error applied, not the facts. If the ORER said a car was 4 feet long, for rate purposes it was 4 feet long. At one time, there were many rates where the minimum weight was dependent on car length. The length shown in the ORER applied, regardless of the actual length.


Gregg Mahlkov

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Nelson" <muskoka@comcast.net>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:55 PM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Equipment registers


Gregg Mahlkov wrote:


Since
it took a month to set up the galleys and proofread it (as a tariff
it could contain NO errors)....
There were errors. Not many, but >0. I can pull some out if you want
examples.

Dave Nelson






Yahoo! Groups Links







Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Gregg Mahlkov wrote:

Under the ICC rules, the error applied, not the facts. If the ORER said a
car was 4 feet long, for rate purposes it was 4 feet long. At one time,
there were many rates where the minimum weight was dependent on car length.
The length shown in the ORER applied, regardless of the actual length.
Inside or Outside Length?

Tim Gilbert


Tony Thompson
 

Allen Ferguson wrote:
I have a question that should have a simple answer. The equipment
registers are referred to as July 1958 for example. What was the
cutoff date for new data?
Throughout most of the era of this list, a very small italic date can be found somewhere in each railroad's section (in the latter part of our list's period, at the end). At one time this indicated the time the entry was complete, and in accord with Gregg Mahlkov's description, was usually a month prior to the cover date of that register. Back earlier in the 20th century, though, dates varied widely. I recall reading some Alton segments as late as 1906, still dated 1902. Of course, it they continue in a series so dated, they remain unchanged, thus greatly reducing their value for research <g>.

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


Tony Thompson
 

Dave Nelson wrote:
There were errors. Not many, but >0. I can pull some out if you want
examples.
IMO, Dave summarizes it perfectly. Probably 99.9% or more of the entries were "correct," but anyone who has spent serious time with ORER shelves has found errors.

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


Gregg Mahlkov <mahlkov@...>
 

Tim,

The only length that matters to a shipper is the inside length. He or she wants to know if the freight will fit in the car!

Gregg Mahlkov

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Gilbert" <tgilbert@sunlink.net>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Equipment registers


Gregg Mahlkov wrote:

Under the ICC rules, the error applied, not the facts. If the ORER said a
car was 4 feet long, for rate purposes it was 4 feet long. At one time,
there were many rates where the minimum weight was dependent on car
length.
The length shown in the ORER applied, regardless of the actual length.
Inside or Outside Length?

Tim Gilbert





Yahoo! Groups Links







Garth Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Gregg,

Thanks for your information on the mechanics of the ORERs. But what clout did the Commission have over prompt reporting of changes? By that I mean, was there any penalty if railroad managers simply failed to report equipment changes during the required submission period? Would another railroad reject interchange of such new cars that were not yet reported?

You say that there could be NO errors. That works well in theory, but as many students of railroad history could tell you, there are many examples of whole classes of cars missing from the ORERs which have been recorded in published photos. Example: D&RGW leased a whole mess of 40' PS-1s lettered in their own road name (possibly beyond the scope of this group, sorry), but which supposedly were not recorded in the ORERs.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Gregg Mahlkov wrote:

Allen, Garth, and list,

Since I furnished entries to the ORER for 18 years, let me explain how it worked. First, for many years, it was a Tariff filed with the ICC, and as such required 30 days' notice from time of receipt at the ICC to effective date. It was issued quarterly, on January 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15, so it had to be in the hands of the Commission by December 15, March 15, June 15, and September 15. Since it took a month to set up the galleys and proofread it (as a tariff it could contain NO errors), the information had to be in the hands of the Tariff Publishing Agent at 15 W. 32nd Street, New York 1, New York, before November 15, February 15, May 15, and August 15. So basically, railroads and private car owners had about two or three weeks from the effective date of an issue to get the changes for the next to the publisher-agent.

Since this list is limited to discussions of pre-1960 cars, I won't go into the changes wrought by computers, UMLER, the demise of the ICC and that ugly, ugly, word, deprescription.

Gregg Mahlkov


Gregg Mahlkov <mahlkov@...>
 

Garth,

The requirements of the ORER only applied to cars that were in interchange service on which either Per Diem in the case of railroad cars, or mileage on the case of private cars, was paid. So, a railroad could accept a car not in the ORER in interchange and then refuse to pay for its use. A strong incentive to make sure interchangeable cars were listed.

Perhaps I was not clear in my meaning about "no errors". As I said in a later post, according to the ICC, if a tariff and the facts differed, the tariff took precedence over the facts. So, if a car was not listed, according to the ICC it did not exist, therefore a "foreign road" did not have to pay for its use while in its lines.

Gregg Mahlkov

----- Original Message -----
From: "Garth Groff" <ggg9y@virginia.edu>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 7:08 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Equipment registers


Gregg,

Thanks for your information on the mechanics of the ORERs. But what
clout did the Commission have over prompt reporting of changes? By that
I mean, was there any penalty if railroad managers simply failed to
report equipment changes during the required submission period? Would
another railroad reject interchange of such new cars that were not yet
reported?

You say that there could be NO errors. That works well in theory, but as
many students of railroad history could tell you, there are many
examples of whole classes of cars missing from the ORERs which have been
recorded in published photos. Example: D&RGW leased a whole mess of 40'
PS-1s lettered in their own road name (possibly beyond the scope of this
group, sorry), but which supposedly were not recorded in the ORERs.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Gregg Mahlkov wrote:

Allen, Garth, and list,

Since I furnished entries to the ORER for 18 years, let me explain how it
worked. First, for many years, it was a Tariff filed with the ICC, and as
such required 30 days' notice from time of receipt at the ICC to effective
date. It was issued quarterly, on January 15, April 15, July 15, and October
15, so it had to be in the hands of the Commission by December 15, March 15,
June 15, and September 15. Since it took a month to set up the galleys and
proofread it (as a tariff it could contain NO errors), the information had
to be in the hands of the Tariff Publishing Agent at 15 W. 32nd Street, New
York 1, New York, before November 15, February 15, May 15, and August 15. So
basically, railroads and private car owners had about two or three weeks
from the effective date of an issue to get the changes for the next to the
publisher-agent.

Since this list is limited to discussions of pre-1960 cars, I won't go into
the changes wrought by computers, UMLER, the demise of the ICC and that
ugly, ugly, word, deprescription.

Gregg Mahlkov





Yahoo! Groups Links








Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

The effective date for submissions was approximately 60 days prior to
the cover date depending on which road was submitting the information,
therefore that would be October 31, 1949 for the PRR or November 1, 1949
for the NYC. I have found that this lag between the information cut-off
date and the quarterly cover date to hold true for all the registers
that I have on the shelf. You will find that the ORER's effective date,
printed on the left side of the cover, would be the first of the month,
but the issue date was nine days later on the tenth of the month (for
example: Effective Date - January 1, 1950; Issue Date - January 10, 1950).

As Gregg had stated, there had to be enough time to get the information
into the agent's hands, do the proofing and set up, typeset the book,
then print it. Then it had to be disseminated to those whose work was
proscribed by the information it contained.

In regard to Ian's remark that some railroads dated their submissions,
he is correct, so you may add the PRR to the list of those that did.

Tom Olsen
7 Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@udel.edu


Ian Cranstone wrote:

On 1-Nov-05, at 2:48 PM, ajfergusonca wrote:



I have a question that should have a simple answer. The equipment
registers are referred to as July 1958 for example. What was the
cutoff date for new data?


There was a time when some of the large entries would provide an actual
effective date for their roster (I believe the New York Central system
did so), and I seem to recall that generally their effective date was
about a month before the publication date of the issue. The shortlines
and many private owners could go months or years between updates,
especially if they had no equipment to report (or very small fleets).

Of course, at that point there was also an effort to include cars on
order that were expected to arrive before the cover date of the issue
as well.

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
lamontc@nakina.net
http://freightcars.nakina.net
http://siberians.nakina.net





Yahoo! Groups Links