Topics

New HO scale 70-ton flatcar


SUVCWORR@...
 

P2K is a 50 ton car the IM is a 70 ton car.

Rich Orr

In a message dated 10/13/2008 7:04:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
bierglaeser@yahoo.com writes:

Foobies???

How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the P2K
53'-6" flat car we already have?

Gene Green
OitwTtoEP

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Walt Lankenau wrote:
AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:
http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg
Now begins the dance to find out how many are foobies.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links







**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)


mcindoefalls
 

AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:

http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg

Walt Lankenau


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Walt Lankenau wrote:
AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:
http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg
Now begins the dance to find out how many are foobies.

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


Gene Green <bierglaeser@...>
 

Foobies???

How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the P2K
53'-6" flat car we already have?

Gene Green
OitwTtoEP

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Walt Lankenau wrote:
AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:
http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg
Now begins the dance to find out how many are foobies.

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@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Ed Hawkins
 

On Oct 13, 2008, at 6:00 PM, Gene Green wrote:

Foobies???

How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the P2K
53'-6" flat car we already have?
Gene,
In addition to the obvious differences in trucks, the following is a
brief description of the differences. The fish-belly sides of the
50-ton AAR cars have a steeper slope than the 70-ton AAR cars, a
different underframe arrangement, and the decks are significantly
different. The 50-ton deck is wood from end to end. The 70-ton deck has
steel plate flush with the top of the deck crosswise at the bolster
plus T-sections of steel between the bolsters and end sills. Thus, the
wood portion of the 70-ton deck is split into 5 sections, two small
sections at each end and one larger section between the bolsters.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Gene Green wrote:
How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the P2K 53'-6" flat car we already have?

Rich Orr replied:
P2K is a 50 ton car the IM is a 70 ton car.
True, but not helpful; and the underframe being a hair beefier is pretty hard to see on a flat car. Should Intermountain actually tool a 70-ton truck, that would be a nice addition--but I'm not holding my breath.

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


Jason Sanford <parkcitybranch@...>
 

I will be interested to see how the car is built, I am assuming a plastic frame, based on their 60' offering, which should make the car feather light.  When I was a modern day modeler (I know.  Shame on me!) I had some of their 60' flat cars and they were very light!  But we all know what assuming does so I will stop there until we hear more.
 
Jason Sanford


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Oct 13, 2008, at 4:40 PM, Anthony Thompson wrote:

Gene Green wrote:
How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the P2K
53'-6" flat car we already have?
Rich Orr replied:
P2K is a 50 ton car the IM is a 70 ton car.
True, but not helpful; and the underframe being a hair beefier is
pretty hard to see on a flat car. Should Intermountain actually tool a
70-ton truck, that would be a nice addition--but I'm not holding my
breath.












The AAR 50 ton and 70 ton flat cars were entirely different designs.
The 50 ton car was based on the Union Pacific F-50-11 class of 1941;
the 70 ton car was derived from a series of cars with notably low
decks built in the early 1940s for the Erie. As noted by Ed Hawkins,
the sides were different and, I will add, the 70 ton cars had 14
stake pockets while the 50 ton cars had 15 per side. The four road
names of IM's initial introduction are all authentic, and other RRs
that rostered AAR 70 ton flats included the Santa Fe, New York
Central, and Wabash, models of which will doubtless be coming from IM
in later production runs. About the trucks I can't say anything
until I see them.

Richard Hendrickson


Andy Carlson
 

But Richard, you have seen them, they were under the Intermountain Railway Co. HO AC&F 2 compartment covered hoppers on display at the Santa Fe meet.
-Andy Carlson,
Ojai CA

--- On Mon, 10/13/08, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com> wrote:

About the trucks I can't say
anything
until I see them.


mcindoefalls
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
wrote:

As noted by Ed Hawkins,
the sides were different and, I will add, the 70 ton cars had 14
stake pockets while the 50 ton cars had 15 per side. The four road
names of IM's initial introduction are all authentic, and other RRs
that rostered AAR 70 ton flats included the Santa Fe, New York
Central, and Wabash, models of which will doubtless be coming from IM
in later production runs.
Thank you, Richard, I thought there was a difference in the stake
pockets but couldn't remember what it was. Santa Fe is among the
initial road names offered by IM; the others are New Haven 17352, Erie
8000, and B&O. (I can't read the Santa Fe and B&O road numbers on the
artwork.)

Walt Lankenau


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Oct 13, 2008, at 6:57 PM, Andy Carlson wrote:

But Richard, you have seen them, they were under the Intermountain
Railway Co. HO AC&F 2 compartment covered hoppers on display at the
Santa Fe meet.



Ah! THOSE trucks! Well, IIRC, they looked pretty good, though that
was several months ago.

Richard Hendrickson


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
The AAR 50 ton and 70 ton flat cars were entirely different designs.
As Ed Hawkins also observed . . . I should have restricted myself to saying that the tonnage rating alone isn't particularly informative. And let's hope for the best on trucks. Intermountain is working on the 1958-cubic foot covered hoppers, also 70-ton cars, so there is a CHANCE of a new truck.

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


Peter Ness
 

Some New Haven 17300-series 70-ton flats (along with welded side
17200-series cars) were converted to TOFC service in the late '30's.
These cars lasted in this role until ca. 1953 when replaced with 40'
flats. The original converted 17300 (and 17200) series cars were
capable of carrying two of the shorter trailers of the time.

To my knowledge all 17300-series cars converted for TOFC service had
the drop staff hand brake relocated from the end of the car to the
side and replaced with a Peacock hand brake. Photos show that after
the cars were returned from TOFC to general service, the side-mounted
hand brake was retained.

Later than 1953 (I don't have my references handy...) some 17300-
series flats were modified with bulkhead ends into 19000-series
bulkhead flats for brick and gypsum service. There were two groups
in the 19000-series, with two different styles of bulkhead ends.

Bottom line, the IM cars are most likely not foobies for New Haven -
except depending on what road numbers are applied and what year the
modeler places them in service, there is a chance the car with road
number may not have been a straight 70t AAR flat.

Hope this helps,
Peter

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Ed Hawkins <hawk0621@...> wrote:


On Oct 13, 2008, at 6:00 PM, Gene Green wrote:

Foobies???

How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the
P2K
53'-6" flat car we already have?
Gene,
In addition to the obvious differences in trucks, the following is
a
brief description of the differences. The fish-belly sides of the
50-ton AAR cars have a steeper slope than the 70-ton AAR cars, a
different underframe arrangement, and the decks are significantly
different. The 50-ton deck is wood from end to end. The 70-ton deck
has
steel plate flush with the top of the deck crosswise at the bolster
plus T-sections of steel between the bolsters and end sills. Thus,
the
wood portion of the 70-ton deck is split into 5 sections, two small
sections at each end and one larger section between the bolsters.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins



David North <davenorth@...>
 

The Santa Fe number is 91500 which is listed in the live list as an FT-V
with 200 built by PSCM in 1944 and it appears all cars had bulkheads added
in 1955, for pulpwood service.

So even though the cars lasted until 1985 with 112 still on the roster in
1981, the apparent offering from IM restricts its suitability to 1944-55.

So great for the steam/diesel transition modeler.

Richard or others, did Santa Fe have other classes of this car, please?



Oh, and the B&O number is 8400



Cheers

Dave


John Hile <john66h@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "mcindoefalls" <mcindoefalls@...> wrote:

AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:

http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg

Walt Lankenau








ProtoWest has a resin kit for this car and some prototype info and
photos on their web site...

http://www.protowestmodels.com/ProtoWest_HO_Kits.htm


John Hile
Blacksburg, VA


Tim O'Connor
 

Owners include AT&SF/B&O/CNJ/DT&I/ERIE/IHB/NH/NYC/PM/WABASH.
And maybe GTW (not sure)

I found a terrific scan online of a CNJ flat loaded w/ autoframes.

My concern is -- will the car have sufficient weight? IRC makes
a 60ft modern equipment flat that is underweight. P2K solved the
problem by making a diecast underframe.

Tim O'Connor

The AAR 50 ton and 70 ton flat cars were entirely different designs.
The 50 ton car was based on the Union Pacific F-50-11 class of 1941;
the 70 ton car was derived from a series of cars with notably low
decks built in the early 1940s for the Erie. As noted by Ed Hawkins,
the sides were different and, I will add, the 70 ton cars had 14
stake pockets while the 50 ton cars had 15 per side. The four road
names of IM's initial introduction are all authentic, and other RRs
that rostered AAR 70 ton flats included the Santa Fe, New York
Central, and Wabash, models of which will doubtless be coming from IM
in later production runs. About the trucks I can't say anything
until I see them.

Richard Hendrickson


Bruce Smith
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "mcindoefalls" <mcindoefalls@...> wrote:

AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:

http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg

Walt Lankenau
On Oct 14, 2008, at 7:48 AM, John Hile wrote:

ProtoWest has a resin kit for this car
As does Sunshine

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."
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0


Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

This seems to be one of the last of that batch of non-"signature" cars that
Richard did articles on, that had not been done.



Of course, I just finished my resin version recently...well, it WAS fun. And
a good kit.



So, when is someone going to do the alternate standard twin offset hopper?
That seems to be the most obvious missing car now, or am I missing another
more obvious?



Lastly, on the subject of flat cars, why hasn't Walthers re-done their GSC
"Commonwealth" car as a state-of-the-art car. No laughing, now...



Elden Gatwood





________________________________

From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John
Hile
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:48 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: New HO scale 70-ton flatcar



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"mcindoefalls" <mcindoefalls@...> wrote:

AAR 70-ton flatcar from Intermountain:

http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg
<http://www.ircmodelersclub.com/images/flyer184w.jpg>

Walt Lankenau
ProtoWest has a resin kit for this car and some prototype info and
photos on their web site...

http://www.protowestmodels.com/ProtoWest_HO_Kits.htm
<http://www.protowestmodels.com/ProtoWest_HO_Kits.htm>

John Hile
Blacksburg, VA


Tim O'Connor
 

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Gatwood, Elden J SAD " <elden.j.gatwood@usace.army.mil>
So, when is someone going to do the alternate standard twin offset hopper?
Sigh... evidently no one. I was very disappointed that Kadee didn't do it.

Lastly, on the subject of flat cars, why hasn't Walthers re-done their GSC
"Commonwealth" car as a state-of-the-art car. No laughing, now...
I like the Walthers car. It is better than Tichy's version and can be easily
improved. And it has a separate deck. What's not to like? It would be nice
to have the longer versions built for several roads in the 1960's.

I'm sure many modelers would like a really good PS-3 two bay hopper. The
only one out there is the ancient Trains Miniature tooling.

If only Athearn had acquired the Stewart models -- then we'd get a bunch of
radically improved hoppers with wire grabs instead of fat plastic grabs.

Tim O'Connor


Greg Martin
 

Richard,

If I am not mistaken the bolster and supports were visible on?top of the deck as well, making the decking itself "fit" around the exposed members, correct? Whereas the 50-ton car has the deck sheathing continuous without interuption.?

Richard, as we have discussed, this is an important?car that has been missing from the plastic offerings.

Greg Martin?

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 6:35 pm
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: New HO scale 70-ton flatcar






On Oct 13, 2008, at 4:40 PM, Anthony Thompson wrote:

Gene Green wrote:
How will the new Intermountain 70-ton flat car differ from the P2K
53'-6" flat car we already have?
Rich Orr replied:
P2K is a 50 ton car the IM is a 70 ton car.
True, but not helpful; and the underframe being a hair beefier is
pretty hard to see on a flat car. Should Intermountain actually tool a
70-ton truck, that would be a nice addition--but I'm not holding my
breath.
The AAR 50 ton and 70 ton flat cars were entirely different designs.
The 50 ton car was based on the Union Pacific F-50-11 class of 1941;
the 70 ton car was derived from a series of cars with notably low
decks built in the early 1940s for the Erie. As noted by Ed Hawkins,
the sides were different and, I will add, the 70 ton cars had 14
stake pockets while the 50 ton cars had 15 per side. The four road
names of IM's initial introduction are all authentic, and other RRs
that rostered AAR 70 ton flats included the Santa Fe, New York
Central, and Wabash, models of which will doubtless be coming from IM
in later production runs. About the trucks I can't say anything
until I see them.

Richard Hendrickson