Date
1 - 20 of 25
Modeling possibilities?
destron@...
I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not familiar
enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a basis for models of these cars. The cars in question are: CSS&SB 1266 (13 panel steel gon), PMcK&Y 91918 (Lot 442-G, steel gon), NC%StL 20000-21399 (steel rebuilt 36' boxcar), and FEC 13001-13030 (33' IL steel hopper). Any suggestions as to what to use as a basis for modeling these would be appreciated. Frank Valoczy Vancouver, BC ----- http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Frank Valoczy wrote:
"I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not familiar enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a basis for models of these cars." Frank, it would be easier for us to help out with suggestions if you have photos you could post. I'll take a shot at the easier ones first: "PMcK&Y 91918 (Lot 442-G, steel gon)" http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/pmcky-91918.jpg Westerfield 8102 or Walthers 932-7450 plus paint & lettering. http://www.westerfield.biz/8102_73542.htm "NC&StL 20000-21399 (steel rebuilt 36' boxcar)" No kits that I know of; this is an unusual prototype for several reasons; very few 36 ft boxcars were rebuilt as steel boxcars, and these cars had a unique combination of features, even for rebuilt boxcars - 8 panel sides, trapezoidal side sill brackets, late Hutchins ends with height extension (square corner with no indent), and what appears to be a lap seam roof. These are distinctive cars, especially as they were painted in the Dixieland scheme with wide band. I'll have to explore this one more to see what approach I'd take - my first gut feeling is to cut down the Tichy model in length and replace the roof and ends, but I'll need a better shot of the roof to figure out what I'd use. The ends are a problem as well, as they are "reversed" ends - the Westerfield Southern SU boxcar Hutchins ends won't work for this. "FEC 13001-13030 (33' IL steel hopper)" Strangely enough, the Athearn peaked end offset hopper. See Railway Prototype Cyclopedia Vol. 1 for photos and more details on appliances. Ben Hom
|
|
Richard Townsend
About three years ago Garrett Rea of Nashville intimated that resin kits based on the NC&StL cars would be forthcoming.? As I understood things then, the project was at the stage of measuring a surviving car body.? I have not heard anything about the project since then.? He told me that the 20000-21179 series had the Hutchins ends, while the 21180-21230 had Murphy ends.? Both series were NC&StL class XM-32.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Richard Townsend Lincoln City, Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: destron@vcn.bc.ca To: stmfc@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 7:27 am Subject: [STMFC] Modeling possibilities? I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not familiar enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a basis for models of these cars. The cars in question are: CSS&SB 1266 (13 panel steel gon), PMcK&Y 91918 (Lot 442-G, steel gon), NC%StL 20000-21399 (steel rebuilt 36' boxcar), and FEC 13001-13030 (33' IL steel hopper). Any suggestions as to what to use as a basis for modeling these would be appreciated. Frank Valoczy Vancouver, BC ----- http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos
|
|
rwitt_2000 <rmwitt@...>
Frank Valoczy wrote:
enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a basis for models of these cars. There are two photo on Elwood's Fallen Flags site: Nos. 1233 and 1258 http://gelwood.railfan.net/cssb/css1233ads.jpg http://gelwood.railfan.net/cssb/css1258ads.jpg The later one, #1258, looks like a USRA WWI 70-ton mill gon still with its drop-ends while the former, #1233, could be a USRA mill gon, but the end is now fixed and the sides look like replacement ones as the side stakes appear to be different than a those on the original car. Again the Westerfield kit or possibly the Walthers model is a place to start. One would have to see the photo of #1266 to make a final recommendation as it appears than these cars are second-hand and each may have unique features. Bob Witt
|
|
destron@...
Again the Westerfield kit or possibly the Walthers model is a place toBob, Thanks for the link to those two pictures. I can't recall where I found it (somewhere in the ether of the www) but I'll post the photo of 1266 to the files section of the group when I get home. Frank Valoczy Vancouver, BC ----- http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Frank Vakoczy wrote:
"...I'll post the photo of [CSS&SB] 1266 to the files section of the group when I get home." Frank, thanks. I concur with Bob Witt - this is a USRA 70-ton steel gon that you can do with either the Westerfield or Walthers models. Decals would be a challenge, but it looks like you can get close using appropriate alphabet and data sets. Ben Hom
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Two more observations on the photo of CSS&SB 1266:
- Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model. - Interesting Monon boxcar in the background to the right. Ben Hom
|
|
regarding
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Frank%27s%20Randomness/CSS% 26SB%201266.jpg On Feb 27, 2008, at 9:46 AM, benjaminfrank_hom wrote: Frank, thanks. I concur with Bob Witt - this is a USRA 70-ton steeland - Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model.Ben, et al, Aren't those 50 ton andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs. Regards Bruce Bruce F. Smith Auburn, AL http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/index.pl/bruce_f._smith2 "Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield." __ / \ __<+--+>________________\__/___ ________________________________ |- ______/ O O \_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ | | / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 \ | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__|| |/_____________________________\|_|________________________________| | O--O \0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0
|
|
destron@...
Two more observations on the photo of CSS&SB 1266:Thanks for the tips, Ben. Want to bet that that Monon boxcar is an SU? ;) Frank Valoczy Vancouver, BC ----- http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Bruce Smith wrote:
"Aren't those 50 ton Andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs." They are DEFINITELY Andrews trucks - cancel that recommendation to use Bowser Crown trucks! Ben Hom
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Frank Valoczy wrote:
"Want to bet that that Monon boxcar is an SU? ;)" Sounds like a good call to me, and entirely appropriate for the 1930s. Also available from Westerfield as kit number 4106. http://www.westerfield.biz/4106_66056.htm Ben Hom
|
|
destron@...
Yeah, the stencil says 100,000, and the ORER listing says that, too. I- Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model.Ben, et al, tweaked the gamma of the image a bit to lighten it and get a clearer view, and compared it to an Accurail Andrews truck I have at hand... looks fairly close to the truck on the image. Frank Valoczy Vancouver, BC ----- http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Frank Valoczy wrote:
"Yeah, the stencil says 100,000, and the ORER listing says that, too. I tweaked the gamma of the image a bit to lighten it and get a clearer view, and compared it to an Accurail Andrews truck I have at hand... looks fairly close to the truck on the image." I agree - I'd go with the Accurail Andrews truck for this model. Ben Hom
|
|
Michael Aufderheide
This is the first photo of one of these cars (8000 series) I've seen in revenue service. Believe me I've been looking. According to the Monon Car Dept. records at the Monon Historical Society these cars were scraped en masse in 1939-40.
Thanks for the photo! Mike Aufderheide Modeling the Monon benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@worldnet.att.net> wrote: Frank Valoczy wrote: "Want to bet that that Monon boxcar is an SU? ;)" Sounds like a good call to me, and entirely appropriate for the 1930s. Also available from Westerfield as kit number 4106. http://www.westerfield.biz/4106_66056.htm Ben Hom --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
|
|
destron@...
This is the first photo of one of these cars (8000 series) I've seen inNothing to thank. Unfortunately I have no idea anymore as to where I found it - it was somewhere out on the ether of the web, though. Frank Valoczy Vancouver, BC ----- http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos
|
|
rwitt_2000 <rmwitt@...>
Ben Hom wrote:
I concur with Bruce and Ben the truck are 50-ton Andrews. The question remains, I believe the CSS received these gondolas second hand, who were the original owners? Bob Witt
|
|
Gatwood, Elden J SAD <Elden.J.Gatwood@...>
Guys;
For that one that looks pretty much like an original USRA clone, with the flat drop ends, the poling loops might be a hint. It may be an ex-NYC or ex-P,McK&Y/P&LE car. The B&O cars got different ends and got modified pretty quickly. The PRR G25's did not match that car in details. The RDG's also did not exactly match that one in details. I also agree that the other one has replacement sides and ends. They look too new for the rest of the car. Elden Gatwood ________________________________ From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rwitt_2000 Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:02 PM To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com Subject: [STMFC] Re: Modeling possibilities? Ben Hom wrote: I concur with Bruce and Ben the truck are 50-ton Andrews. The question remains, I believe the CSS received these gondolas second hand, who were the original owners? Bob Witt
|
|
El Jefe
Hi Steam Era Friends,
On a similar subject regarding gons, why is it that the feature distinguishing steam-era freight cars from modern era seems to be the long vertical brake wheel shafting as opposed to the short horizontal brake wheel shaft seen on modern freight cars? Check out an example: http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/nyc-726083.jpg If the service life of this NYC 623-G lot car lasted until 1982, would it be a good guess that Despatch shops or whoever updated the look of the car to have a more modern brake wheel arrangement? New to group with a newbie kind of question. Allen Smithee California, U.S.A. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
|
|
Carl J. Marsico <Carlmarsico@...>
"J. W." <ln_f7@yahoo.com> wrote:
"distinguishing steam-era freight cars from modern era " <snip> It depends when you make the cut-off from "steam" to "modern" If you go by the definitions set by STMFC and MFCL, the cut-off is 1960, and by that time, the "long vertical brake wheel shafting" was outdated. Carl J. Marsico
|
|
benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
Carl Marsico wrote:
"It depends when you make the cut-off from "steam" to "modern" If you go by the definitions set by STMFC and MFCL, the cut-off is 1960, and by that time, the "long vertical brake wheel shafting" was outdated." Outdated, perhaps, but a sizable number of older cars still had this arrangement into the 1960s. Additionally, "long vertical brake wheel shafting" doesn't necessarily mean a lack of power hand brakes on a car either, particularly for flat cars. Ben Hom
|
|