Tim;
That is probably a better idea even than for a written publication, as
so much of it can be periodically updated.

Have a good one,

Elden

--- In STMFC@..., "Gatwood, Elden" <Elden.Gatwood@h...>
wrote:
A niche largely unfilled to-date is a good discussion of the most
common

cars each RR owned, by class, by era, so that one might model those
classes.

I recall in years past that MR had articles on smaller railroads (GBW
comes to mind). There were 50 or so class 1 railroads, right? There
are probably experts for most of those roads.

Ed

Elden

This probably is an appropriate idea for a publication like Ted's which
is aimed at modelers. I once wrote up a 1953 PFE roster with notes
indicating which cars could readily be modeled in HO scale -- it was a
very high percentage as I recall, and even more so today. I have thought
about doing it for SP/T&NO freight cars, but like everything it would take
a lot of time to do. Plus I think the best way to present such data is on
a web site, with hyperlinks to model & prototype photos...

Tim O.

All interested;

With time increasingly short, there ARE many that will take the route of
buying what prototypically-accurate freight cars as are available to
them, and be thankful for it. Kadee sells a lot of PS-1 and PS-2's for
that reason, even if most on the lists would not own up to it.

Further articles covering existing PS-1's, then, might be viewed as
being less interesting than those covering how to model some of the
PS-1's that have NOT been done by Kadee (and perhaps may never be done).
Another series/article might be those that cover the
not-available-in-RTR-nor-will-ever-be predecessor PS welded boxes
(PS-zero and others) and how to accurately model them. Unfortunately,
this requires one to do the models along with the research, or to show
how one might do it.

A niche largely unfilled to-date is a good discussion of the most common
cars each RR owned, by class, by era, so that one might model those
classes. While Ted has done ground-breaking work in covering
"signature" cars for many roads, his work is very era specific, and so,
has addressed only a portion of this large subject area. Rightly so, as
the bigger effort of taking on multiple eras would kill anyone. It may
be impossible for one person to do this, so it could be an effort taken
on by one group for each decade or so.

One approach that could be interesting:

1) present short history of each RR's fleet, with perhaps some
discussion about why each fleet was composed of what it was, and what
products they tended to originate and/or terminate (EX: The P&WV was an
interesting bridge route extending from X to Z. The P&WV had a limited
traffic base consisting primarily of coal, finished steel, and Y. They
interchanged with the following roads, at the following locations, and
their cars in interchange were seen primarily on roads in and around
Pgh, PA, but could have been seen rarely most anywhere. However, given
their dominant originating traffic, they would have primarily
interchanged their own cars, with coal loads, to the XYZ. Finished
steel traffic on the P&WV would have been primarily interchanged onto
the ABC at XYZ< for forwarding to auto assembly plants at LMN. They
interchanged X cars (by dates), in the following classes (ranked by
numbers in interchange), and....);

2) present numerical data on roads, classes, and dates (Primary classes
on the P&WV: box cars - early PS-1; dates and numbers in service;
post-war AAR - ditto; etc) ;

3) present photos of each important or numerous class, by era, if
possible, and covering each significant P&L scheme, with dates of
applicability (PS-1 in as-delivered scheme - 1948 to mid-to-late 50's
(1954-'58 or so) white on BCR...next);

4) present overview of modeling options for the most numerous classes on
each RR, decal info, paint, details;

5) present modeling article, or summary, on each class.

Finally, the approach we are taking in TKM (right or wrong) is to
present only as much info on each class to model it fairly accurately.
We have boiled it down to a short intro, proto history, class/subclass
numerical timeline, and how to model it, with pics. I would think that
more detailed articles, showing construction details and such, would
only appeal to a VERY small group of aficionados, so we have stopped
prior to that point. Classes that required more detail, like the X29,
were covered in more detail, and Ben rightly guessed that the infinite
details of this class were sought after by our readers. No one has yet
asked for more detail, just other subclasses, types of car, and most of
all, photos. But, TKM only covers the PRR. One road of many.

I realize it is a monumental task, but I suspect that is where we are
all headed, eventually.

Have a great day,

Elden Gatwood

I think it was Jim Six or someone he is associated with.

--- In STMFC@..., "Schuyler Larrabee"
<schuyler.larrabee@v...> wrote:

Hey, now there's an idea. With these new color printers, just take

a photo of the car in question,

photoshop it into orthogonal shape, print it out on card stock at the

right size, and glue it onto a

block of wood! Glue on some ends from one of the detail

manufacturers, screw on a coupla trucks,

and you're ready to go!

=========================
Actually it is already being done.

Several modelers are printing the images of car sides onto decal paper
and applying a "car sized" decal instead of painting the car. In a
similar vein people are making brick wall decals and using them.

Dave H.

I usually refrain from getting into discussion such as this because I have
been deeply involved doing work requested by the magazines as well as
engineering design for most of the major manufacturers for almost 50 years. This design
work includes some cars that recently have just hit the dealer shelves.

So it is not ethical for me to discuss my "clients" plans or internal
workings.

However, in the way of general comments relalting to freight car modeling, I
think the publication of prototype drawings of cars and locomotives wi;ll be
gone from the model press in the next three or four years. It costs a lot for
the magazines to have someone make such drawings plus there are few of us
"old timers" who are willing to do such time consuming drawings. It also costs a
lot in terms of space in the magazine and my sources report very low general
reader interest in them.

The making of protpype drawings is an interesting one. They have progressed
over the years in therms of detail, accuracy, etc much as we have progressed
from "claw" door guides on Athearn models. But I think the end is in sight. Much
of what I ahve drawn is from crumbling blue prints or measuring a real car;
and if I didn't draw them up the data would be lost forever.

While technology advances in leaps and bounds the idea of scanning photos and
turning out an accurate model is something else. It reminds me of the story
of the photographer who took a picture of a woman's little boy. Then she asked
if he could remove the cap from the picture. He said that he ceratinly could
but asked which side the boys hair should be aprted when he did the retouch.
To which the woman replied "Don't be silly, you will see when you take the cap
off!". Moral: if the data isn't there, the data isn't there.

But rapid prototyping is an exciting new development. No doubt you can scan
an O gauge car and make an HO model. A local outfit has done this to one of my
daughters horse sculptures and made a 1/4 size copy...cost about $2000.

The times are a changin....

Chuck Yungkurth
Boulder CO

Schuyler Larrabee wrote:

<>Hey, now there's an idea. With these new color printers, just take a
photo of the car in question,
photoshop it into orthogonal shape, print it out on card stock at the
right size, and glue it onto a
block of wood! Glue on some ends from one of the detail manufacturers,
screw on a coupla trucks,
and you're ready to go! Keep the lights in the right place, and the
shadows of the grabs and
ladders will look JUST right!

Already been done. I remember (but being a senior I can't remember where
or when) that someone took photos of a graffiti laden car and had
decals made of the complete car sides. The decals were then applied to
an undecorated car and the details added. Actually looked pretty good.

Regards, Spen Kellogg

Except for maybe printing your own car sides...

Jim Eckman

Hey, now there's an idea. With these new color printers, just take a photo of the car in question,
photoshop it into orthogonal shape, print it out on card stock at the right size, and glue it onto a
block of wood! Glue on some ends from one of the detail manufacturers, screw on a coupla trucks,
and you're ready to go! Keep the lights in the right place, and the shadows of the grabs and
ladders will look JUST right!

8^)

SGL

From: GCRDS@...
---> One more observation, then I'm going to bed...it's been a long day...
***************I know that Model Railroader Bashing is practically the national sport here, but has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the reason it is so "bad" is simply the fact that you have advanced to the point where your paths are no longer the same?

That's true, having looked through every single decade of Model Railroader starting from #1, the balance of articles hasn't changed much, less scratchbuilding stuff, but then you don't have to make your own locos anymore if you don't want to. I've found that there is anywhere from 0-3 articles an issue that are good and most of the really old freight scratchbuilding stuff has been brought out in book form at one time or another so the photos and the plans are the only good bit for freight car modelling aspects. I would say for wood or paper construction, its pretty much been covered at one time or another! Except for maybe printing your own car sides...

Jim Eckman

From: "Mike Brock" <brockm@...>
Tim O'Connor writes:

I would make the argument that home layouts are mostly a diversion from the serious business of research and modeling!

I guess that's true if you have access to a nice club layout...

I think Tim is overlooking the fact that buiding models of real railroads is as difficult as building models of parts of them....frt cars. In fact, building models of scenery and structures is also as difficult and skills as a carpenter won't help much...except to get one started.

That's why it's a great hobby, even though I admit to spending much more time on freight cars than any other hobby aspects lately. But then I like freight cars!

From: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...>

Not at all Mike. I'm not against layouts... I just think elaborate
HOME layouts are ultimately a waste of time better spent working on
models or on a good club layout. You see, it's the temporariness of
the thing that bothers me.

I wasn't planning on taking it with me so everything is temporary, including most club layouts! I can't imagine my stuff being around 50 years from now, so I'm not worried about it.

From: Bob Webber <no17@...>
Subject: model magazines and freight cars

Then again... the 2004 NG convention outdrew the NMRA convention. One was a professional show put on by professionals, the other.. wasn't.

??? Same people put on the NG convention here that normally put on NMRA conventions. We also have locally the cool little meets that showcase prototype work, especially freight cars which is something I don't normally see at the general NMRA meetings. STFMC is a niche all by itself. And most of us are probably in even a smaller niche! Some of us sick types even like TOC and earlier freight cars to the exclusion of all the modern stuff discussed here. STMFCers could certainly organize some more mini-meets, the On30 types do that locally and its fun. Bigger ain't better, a hour or two looking at a handful of good kit or scratch freight models with friends could certainly be productive and enjoyable.

Jim Eckman

In a message dated 12/22/2005 9:40:47 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
Elden.Gatwood@... writes:

But, TKM only covers the PRR. One road of many.



---> If I were to make any complaint about TKM, the fact that it only covers
the Pennsy would be it! <G> That is, BTW, intended to be a complement.

---> While not a PRR modeler per se, I, of course, do have, and need some
more PRR equipment, and TKM helps in this regard. But I enjoy it for many
reasons, not the least of which is the extremely professional manner in which it
is crafted. I'm a great admirer of the Headlight (WP), Prospector (D&RGW), the
Streamliner and the Warbonnet (the four that I'm primarily interested in),
and appreciate the info that has been shared in these magazines. But feel TKM
is an excellent example of what can be done. While I'm pleased with the price,
it is the one 'off line' magazine that I would probably purchase if it came
in print.

Take Care!

Brian R. Termunde
West Jordan, Utah

"Ship and Travel the Grand Canyon Line!"
Grand Canyon Railway
Utah District

In a message dated 12/22/2005 6:44:14 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
schuyler.larrabee@... writes:

Except for maybe printing your own car sides...

Jim Eckman

Hey, now there's an idea.


---> I can't remember which magazine it was in, I think MR, but someone did
just that. He did an N scale BN caboose (with graffiti). There was also an
article about doing the same for buildings (again, IIRC, in MR).

Take Care!

Brian R. Termunde
West Jordan, Utah

"Ship and Travel the Grand Canyon Line!"
Grand Canyon Railway
Utah District

Ah, Pat, you missed my point then and continue to miss it now. Likely on purpose.

On the other hand, the reason that magazines and even more so Yahoo groups are losing their hold is Balkanization. Take a moment to add up all of the pages of magazines that come to print in a quarter. Some most of us rarely look at (an example was made of the N scale articles). Heck, there's 3 or more lists just for Sn3 - no telling how many for On30 - for all NG interests, there are likely 50 or more lists. Multiply that by many more when it comes to SG. Even our moderator isn't moderate in this regard as he offers to draw up another list about once a month (which though sounding critical to one person, isn't meant to be). How many modelers' lists are there? If you add up each one related to a specific road (AT&SF has at least 3, maybe more), region, or weather spot, you end up with a hell of a lot of lists - and there is even some likelihood that something in one or two of those lists might be of interest to you.

In terms of the Rio Grande, people want to separate steam from diesel, freight from passenger, narrow gauge from standard gauge, etc. And that's on a relatively small line. Same thing happens with other railroads, just differently. How many branch lines or divisions of the Santa Fe have their own list? So, you have a question pertaining to traffic of one sort or the other or even something of <gasp> history and research - and the end result is that the data is so compartmentalized that it becomes nearly useless for the larger interest. Then there are the "tweener" subjects that get asked on one list (for instance, express or baggage on this one) and those on, say the passenger car list don't (typically) see the benefit. Unless you want to be drowned by endless discussions on where to get lead every 4 months on all lists, you have to either pick and choose or go to digests and hope the digestion is comprehensive enough not to miss something useful.

So again, look at how many pages of modeling are available per quarter. Or, perhaps better stated, how many pages of modeling with research and historical references. The serious ones are going to attempt to keep their heads above water by being more specific in their purchases. Then when you have the majors attempting to fill all sails, it just isn't possible. So they typically, except in exceptional cases, fail. Wooden trains for the Christmas Tree? Yeah, some reach there for a serious magazine, but they have to use something. Cutting articles out and filing them and throwing the rest of the magazine away? i can recall several variations of that theme, and they didn't require pages to explain it. So it isn't surprising that MR & RMC isn't meeting the need - or MM is not doing as well as it might (the stance on the UP issue didn't help, though as one of the only ones to say it out loud, it was a brave thing to do). Nor is it surprising that Martin's meetings don't have huge populations (and thank Glub for that). How many conventions, seminars, shows, etc. can you go to? How many are there? Again, Balkinization has fragmented the community such that only special interests thrive within a small population.

Then again... the 2004 NG convention outdrew the NMRA convention. One was a professional show put on by professionals, the other.. wasn't. Hardly fair comparison, though the numbers have been steadily closing. But that is one "specially" against the polyglot.


At 09:56 PM 12/21/2005, STMFC@... wrote:

Message: 25
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 03:55:31 -0000
From: "Patrick Wider" <pwider@...>
Subject: Re: model magazines and freight cars

--- In STMFC@..., "Schuyler Larrabee" <schuyler.larrabee@v...> wrote:

I'm with Gene.

SGL

But those longer articles give all the details! Shorter
isn't the answer. I vote for higher prices and more pages.
Gene Green

So it's two for longer articles and higher prices and one against. Remember - there was
one guy who lambasted me because he missed the offer to save $5 on our last book!

Pat Wider

Bob Webber

In a message dated 12/21/2005 9:40:27 P.M. Mountain Standard Time,
brockm@... writes:

The lifeless engine might grant one the means to study and analyze but the
one rolling gives one the reason to be interested at all...at least to me.


----> This is how I see it. Personally I'd prefer to have all 95-100 percent
accurate freight (and passenger) cars and locomotives, but I also realize at
this stage (especially in N Scale), it isn't going to happen, at least not
yet. As long as I can obtain decent running, somewhat accurate cars, I'm
happy. I figure that I can always replace my older stock as newer and better
equipment as it comes along, but my immediate priority right now is to get the
Grand Canyon District up and running. If I need to make compromises now, so be
it. However I do want to make conscience compromises, IOW, yeah, I know that
this IM box doesn't accurately represent this particular prototype, but the
P/L is accurate for 1952, so it will work ok until I can get a better model. I
know, thanks to this group, that the CB&Q didn't use Chinese red until 1958,
so if I do decide to use the Q Red cars that I have, at least I'll know to
hide them when (and if) the Prototype Police come a knocking! <G>

---> One more observation, then I'm going to bed...it's been a long day...
***************I know that Model Railroader Bashing is practically the
national sport here, but has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the reason it is
so "bad" is simply the fact that you have advanced to the point where your
paths are no longer the same?

---> I don't enjoy MR as much as I did when I was younger, but back then I
was interested in railroads. It didn't matter if it was a freelance railroad,
or if it was an accurate representation of a real railroad. Now, years later,
my tastes have become more defined. And while I can enjoy an article on a
freelance MRR, I do prefer ones on accurately detailed prototype based MRR's.
And where I was once happy to run steam powered freights past Amtrak
Passengers, I cannot enjoy this as I once did. Is there something wrong with this? No,
I don't think so. It depends on what you're interested in. I have a friend
who could care less about prototype accuracy. He's happy with IHC passenger
cars and freight cars (with their little tabs to hold the body on!). But he is
having a great time! Personally, I am more demanding of my hobby. Again, I
don't mind making compromises, but I want those to be informed decisions, not
accidents. So while MR is not as enjoyable to me now as it once was, I feel
it is because I've changed, and (hopefully) matured.

---> The hobby continues to change and develop, and while it seems to take
an occasional detour, in the long run, things seem to balance out. We do have
a great variety of cars (both freight and Passenger), as well as locomotives
to pull them with. We have structure kits (or RTR buildings --- how can a
building...which by definition, is stationary [except in California, with its
earthquakes] be RTR anyhow!?) to populate our MRR's and the internet to
research a structure that isn't available. If I was going to complain about
anything, it would be the limited run mentality that seems to be the rule nowadays.
Frankly, I do also resent the RTR mentality that seems to dominate the hobby
at the moment. I do enjoy a kit, and resent not being able to buy them as
easily as I once could. I feel that both options should be available, again, to
each their own.

----> Well, this went on longer then I intended. So I'll stop now...I'm sure
that I heard a sigh of relief and a "About time" out there...<G>


Take Care!

Brian R. Termunde
West Jordan, Utah

"Ship and Travel the Grand Canyon Line!"
Grand Canyon Railway
Utah District