Build date of NP 39487?


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 


gary laakso
 

My trusty NP Freight Equipment Guide of 1940 left the year of construction blank but noted 216 were in revenue service as of March 1, 1939. Since W&R imported them, i took a quick look at the flyer but no builders' date was revealed. The decals that were prepared for W&R by Microscale used 1918 construction dates. The 1918 date for the last batch of truss rod DS boxcars was confirmed in the article in the NPRHA article on the post-WWI Forty-ton boxcars in Vol 13-3 , summer 1994.
However, Funaro & Camerlengo's kit instructions for both the short (8 foot internal height) and the 1918 8 foot nine inch height states that the 39250-39499 class truss rod DS cars were built in 1916. They were re-numbered in late 1930s to the 35800-3599 series.

gary laakso
south of Mike Brock near Budford-- is that a storage track or a mainline?
vasa0vasa@earthlink.net

----- Original Message -----
From: Kurt Laughlin
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 12/23/2009 4:03:55 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Build date of NP 39487?



As seen here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/us_army_rolling_along/4208381799/sizes/o/in/set-72157622932596875/

I'm trying to date the photos.

Thx,
KL

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Tim O'Connor
 

built around 1912, I think

At 12/23/2009 04:03 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
As seen here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/us_army_rolling_along/4208381799/sizes/o/in/set-72157622932596875/

I'm trying to date the photos.

Thx,
KL


Bill Daniels <billinsf@...>
 

I would guess that the photos date to the late teens to the early 1920's. Maybe able to even guess around 1917 or so...

Bill Daniels

Tucson, AZ

--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@comcast.net> wrote:

From: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Build date of NP 39487?
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 23, 2009, 3:44 PM







 











built around 1912, I think



At 12/23/2009 04:03 PM Wednesday, you wrote:

As seen here:
http://www.flickr. com/photos/ us_army_rolling_ along/4208381799 /sizes/o/ in/set-721576229 32596875/
I'm trying to date the photos.
Thx,
KL
























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Bill Daniels wrote:
I would guess that the photos date to the late teens to the early 1920's. Maybe able to even guess around 1917 or so...
Nope. The tank is a French Renault tank design, called M-17, built late in WW I. Since I assume the photo was taken in the U.S., it's likely a test or tryout of the M-17 by the U.S. military. I doubt the photo can predate the mid-1920s, and might well be later, since American tank design remained backward nearly until 1940.

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


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

In wrote:
Since I assume the photo was taken in the U.S., it's likely a test or tryout of the M-17 by the U.S. military.
Some of you who know armor history may have realized how similar this tank is to the U.S. design of a "3-ton tank" late in WW I, obviously based on the Renault M-17 but with a machine gun in the front plate. The tank in the photo we are discussing has a rotating turret with a gun situated there, which the Ford tank did not have, but which was standard in the Renault tank.

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


Bill Daniels <billinsf@...>
 

You mean, of course, the Renault FT-17 tank. As you mentioned it was developed late in World War I by the French, and was the state-of-the-art in armor during the late war period. After the war it formed the foundation of the armored forces of several countries, including the United States. By 1940, it was obsolete. Knowing that, I would venture to guess that these pictures (there are a total of 27 photos in the group) show the initial tanks being tested by the U.S. Army at Fort Brown, Texas... and I will stick to my original circa 1920 dating based on those photos.

Bill Daniels

Tucson, AZ

--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Anthony Thompson <thompson@signaturepress.com> wrote:

From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@signaturepress.com>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Build date of NP 39487?
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 23, 2009, 5:47 PM







 









Bill Daniels wrote:

I would guess that the photos date to the late teens to the early
1920's. Maybe able to even guess around 1917 or so...


Nope. The tank is a French Renault tank design, called M-17,

built late in WW I. Since I assume the photo was taken in the U.S.,

it's likely a test or tryout of the M-17 by the U.S. military. I doubt

the photo can predate the mid-1920s, and might well be later, since

American tank design remained backward nearly until 1940.



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@signaturep ress.com

Publishers of books on railroad history


pberghs@...
 

It is probably a Ford 6 ton tank

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Build date of NP 39487?



In wrote:
> Since I assume the photo was taken in the U.S., it's likely a test
> or tryout of the M-17 by the U.S. military.

Some of you who know armor history may have realized how similar
this tank is to the U.S. design of a "3-ton tank" late in WW I,
obviously based on the Renault M-17 but with a machine gun in the
front plate. The tank in the photo we are discussing has a rotating
turret with a gun situated there, which the Ford tank did not have,
but which was standard in the Renault tank.

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


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Bill Daniels wrote:
You mean, of course, the Renault FT-17 tank.
Same tank, which different historians give different names. The one book I have with any French correspondence on these designs does refer to M-17. It's possible that this designated the machine-gun version. At least the M-17 was small enough to be carried on flat cars (required freight car content). But upon closer examination, there's no doubt that the tank in question is the American version, even though copied rather closely from the French original.

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


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson

Bill Daniels wrote:
I would guess that the photos date to the late teens to the early
1920's. Maybe able to even guess around 1917 or so...
Nope. The tank is a French Renault tank design, called M-17,
built late in WW I. Since I assume the photo was taken in the U.S.,
it's likely a test or tryout of the M-17 by the U.S. military. I doubt
the photo can predate the mid-1920s, and might well be later, since
American tank design remained backward nearly until 1940.

----- Original Message -----

The date that is supposed for the photos is 1918 to 1922. The tank is actually a US built M1917 six-ton tank which was an Americanized Renault FT-17. (The M1917 had the muffler on the left, used a riveted octagonal turret rather than a cast, conical one, and had a steel idler rather than one of composite wood/steel construction. It was also dimensioned in Imperial units rather than metric.) There were less than 100 M1917s built before the Armistice and they were on the way to France, so this is almost certainly 1919 or later. The rather significant military presence for such an out of the way place is explained by the happenings south of the border: The Mexican Revolution, Pancho Villa, and the Zapatistas. The Revolution ended officially in 1920. So . . . you could figure the American military presence to peter out starting in 1920; these pictures are probably 1925 or earlier. I was hoping the freight cars could narrow that range down a bit.

The US used the FT-17 almost exclusively in WW I, but the trials and training were done "over there". American tank design in the interwar period was probably no worse nor better than that of any other country at the time. The big problem was that no one really had a good idea of just what they wanted tanks to do until about 1930, so the designs were equally confused. The more uniquely American tank problem of the time was that we didn't make any.

KL


Mark
 

Searched and found:

http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1917.html

Mark Morgan

--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@verizon.net> wrote:

From: Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Build date of NP 39487?
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 23, 2009, 10:30 PM







 









----- Original Message -----

From: Anthony Thompson



Bill Daniels wrote:

I would guess that the photos date to the late teens to the early
1920's. Maybe able to even guess around 1917 or so...


Nope. The tank is a French Renault tank design, called M-17,

built late in WW I. Since I assume the photo was taken in the U.S.,

it's likely a test or tryout of the M-17 by the U.S. military. I doubt

the photo can predate the mid-1920s, and might well be later, since

American tank design remained backward nearly until 1940.



----- Original Message -----



The date that is supposed for the photos is 1918 to 1922. The tank is

actually a US built M1917 six-ton tank which was an Americanized Renault

FT-17. (The M1917 had the muffler on the left, used a riveted octagonal

turret rather than a cast, conical one, and had a steel idler rather than

one of composite wood/steel construction. It was also dimensioned in

Imperial units rather than metric.) There were less than 100 M1917s built

before the Armistice and they were on the way to France, so this is almost

certainly 1919 or later. The rather significant military presence for such

an out of the way place is explained by the happenings south of the border:

The Mexican Revolution, Pancho Villa, and the Zapatistas. The Revolution

ended officially in 1920. So . . . you could figure the American military

presence to peter out starting in 1920; these pictures are probably 1925 or

earlier. I was hoping the freight cars could narrow that range down a bit.



The US used the FT-17 almost exclusively in WW I, but the trials and

training were done "over there". American tank design in the interwar

period was probably no worse nor better than that of any other country at

the time. The big problem was that no one really had a good idea of just

what they wanted tanks to do until about 1930, so the designs were equally

confused. The more uniquely American tank problem of the time was that we

didn't make any.



KL

























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
American tank design in the interwar period was probably no worse nor better than that of any other country at
the time.
As the saying goes, Kurt, you cannot be serious. It's certainly true that everyone was feeling their way to an appropriate and useful design, but Russian and English ideas were far ahead of anything Americans did; and I assume you've heard of the German tank forces.
But this list is not the appropriate place to debate armor history, so I'll stop here.

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


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
American tank design in the interwar period was probably no worse
nor better than that of any other country at
the time.
As the saying goes, Kurt, you cannot be serious. It's certainly
true that everyone was feeling their way to an appropriate and useful
design, but Russian and English ideas were far ahead of anything
Americans did; and I assume you've heard of the German tank forces.
But this list is not the appropriate place to debate armor
history, so I'll stop here.

----- Original Message -----
Yes I am serious, and yes, you are wrong, but I'll be happy to stop here, as per your usual request when challenged and you want to have the last word.

And by the way, I think it was you dragged this into a tank rather than a freight car discussion.

KL


Gene <losgatos48@...>
 

My NP Freight Equipment book from 1-24-40 shows that that this car was one of group that was renumbered from four different series. The earliest build date is 1907 with the latest being 1912 for a group built at South Tacoma shops.

Gene Deimling

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@...> wrote:

As seen here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/us_army_rolling_along/4208381799/sizes/o/in/set-72157622932596875/

I'm trying to date the photos.

Thx,
KL

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Kurt Laughlin (attempting to have the last word) wrote:
Yes I am serious, and yes, you are wrong, but I'll be happy to stop here, as per your usual request when challenged and you want to have the last word.
Read any tank history, is all I can say, and see if you think Kurt is right. But it's true that it's my fault there's this much discussion of tanks on the list. My bad.

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


michael bishop <goldrod_1@...>
 

The tank is an M1917 built in the United State by the Van Dorns Ironworks. The First tank rolled of the floor October 18 and only ten ever reach France before the Armistice, none were used in actual combat. A total of 950 were built for the Us Army, the US Marines used some in 1927 in China. The tank had a weight of 6 tons. So with that, the photo is sometime after 1919. Still does not answer the build date of the NP car.
 
Michael Bishop

--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Anthony Thompson <thompson@signaturepress.com> wrote:


From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@signaturepress.com>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Build date of NP 39487?
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, December 23, 2009, 9:34 PM


 



Kurt Laughlin (attempting to have the last word) wrote:
Yes I am serious, and yes, you are wrong, but I'll be happy to stop
here, as per your usual request when challenged and you want to have
the last word.
Read any tank history, is all I can say, and see if you think
Kurt is right. But it's true that it's my fault there's this much
discussion of tanks on the list. My bad.

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@signaturep ress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

michael bishop wrote:
So with that, the photo is sometime after 1919. Still does not answer the build date of the NP car.
At least it means the car was built prior to 1919. That's not an almost new car.

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


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

Thanks Gene. Any indication of when this particular car had 39487 assigned?

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Gene

My NP Freight Equipment book from 1-24-40 shows that that this car was one of group that was renumbered from four different series. The earliest build date is 1907 with the latest being 1912 for a group built at South Tacoma shops.


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

I invite all interested parties to do so, but please make sure to read my initial statement as well: "American tank design *in the interwar period* was probably no worse nor better than that of any other country at the time."

Feel free to send your conclusions to Tony, at home, at his publishing business, or at the university; whichever signature line he used at the time to let us all know that he knows what he's talking about, and we don't.

Toodles!
KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson (determined to have the last word despite previous statements to the contrary)

Kurt Laughlin (attempting to have the last word) wrote:
Yes I am serious, and yes, you are wrong, but I'll be happy to stop
here, as per your usual request when challenged and you want to have
the last word.
Read any tank history, is all I can say, and see if you think
Kurt is right.


Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi Gene,

Since we have such a lovely image of this freight car available on-line is there any interest on your part to scan and post the diagram on-line for those who might be interested in taking this a little further?

Thanks - Claus Schlund

-----Original Message-----
From: Gene [mailto:losgatos48@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 08:22 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Build date of NP 39487?

My NP Freight Equipment book from 1-24-40 shows that that this car was one of group that was renumbered from four different series. The earliest build date is 1907 with the latest being 1912 for a group built at South Tacoma shops.

Gene Deimling


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@...> wrote:

As seen here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/us_army_rolling_along/4208381799/sizes/o/in/set-72157622932596875/

I'm trying to date the photos.

Thx,
KL

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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

Yahoo! Groups Links