C&O Box cars


Schuyler Larrabee
 

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg

That's a photo of a C&O box car.

Would 14704 be a car like this one? Fallen Flags doesn't have a C&O car diagram book or a listing
of car series. And would it have looked like this in 1954?

SGL


al_brown03
 

Several sources list this series as C&O 14000-14989, built 6/1945,
so C&O 14704 and 14955 would be almost identical cars (their trucks
were different). Pat Wider's article in RP CYC 8 shows (p 82) a
builder's photo of C&O 14111; the original paint scheme differs from
the one you show (same photo appears in MRG 3-4/95, p 50).

In RMJ 6/93, p 15, is a yard photo dated 8/50, which shows a car
from this series in what looks like the as-built paint scheme.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


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

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg

That's a photo of a C&O box car.

Would 14704 be a car like this one? Fallen Flags doesn't have a
C&O car diagram book or a listing
of car series. And would it have looked like this in 1954?

SGL


al_brown03
 

Several sources list this series as C&O 14000-14989, built 6/1945,
so C&O 14704 and 14955 would be almost identical cars (their trucks
were different). Pat Wider's article in RP CYC 8 shows (p 82) a
builder's photo of C&O 14111; the original paint scheme differs from
the one you show (same photo appears in MRG 3-4/85, p 50).

In RMJ 6/93, p 15, is a yard photo dated 8/50, which shows a car
from this series in what looks like the as-built paint scheme.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


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

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg

That's a photo of a C&O box car.

Would 14704 be a car like this one? Fallen Flags doesn't have a
C&O car diagram book or a listing
of car series. And would it have looked like this in 1954?

SGL


Tim O'Connor
 

Schuyler Larrabee wrote:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg
Would 14704 be a car like this one? And would it have looked
like this in 1954?
Al Brown already answered the roster question -- but note
there was a subtle change in the For Progress logo from when
it first appeared in the late 1940's. Originally the line of
"smoke" was cloud-like with wavy lines. The above photo shows
the later, diesel-era emblem, and the line of smoke is now a
straight line. I am not sure of the date of this change. Red
Caboose did some cars decorated in the For Progress scheme
with the original emblem.

Tim O'Connor


Schuyler Larrabee
 

Thanks very . . .

SGL

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On
Behalf Of al_brown03
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 3:21 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: C&O Box cars

Several sources list this series as C&O 14000-14989, built
6/1945, so C&O 14704 and 14955 would be almost identical cars
(their trucks were different). Pat Wider's article in RP CYC
8 shows (p 82) a builder's photo of C&O 14111; the original
paint scheme differs from the one you show (same photo
appears in MRG 3-4/95, p 50).

In RMJ 6/93, p 15, is a yard photo dated 8/50, which shows a
car from this series in what looks like the as-built paint scheme.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

--- In STMFC@... <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
, "Schuyler Larrabee"
<schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg
<http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/co/co14955alr.jpg>

That's a photo of a C&O box car.

Would 14704 be a car like this one? Fallen Flags doesn't have a
C&O car diagram book or a listing
of car series. And would it have looked like this in 1954?

SGL