Tank Car Color Guide


gary laakso
 

My copy of Morning Sun's Tank Car Color Guide by James Kinkaid arrived today. It has a wonderful collection of rare color pix, some I noted are: Western Union water car WUTX 4522; 2 UTLX fully enclosed housing tank cars UTLX 85704 and 89525; Linde industrial gas boxcars; 14 pix of 3 dome tank cars; MHAX helium cars; ACFX "chlorine tank cars" , vinegar wooden tank cars: NFPX 22 and SBIX 1678 and many tank cars ( nearly 50%) far too modern for the STMFC era.

The author is perplexed if a car does not have a builders date and the captions do not reveal manufacturers if not painted on the car. For instance, on page 19 there are 2 pictures of Gulf tank cars, WRNX 14132 and 14415, with the last sentence of the caption reading: "Obviously cars from different sources comprised this set. At present the source for these cars remains unknown." The polling pockets on the built up bolsters of 14415 show it is a GATC design.

I few hours with the material discussed in this group concerning identifying tank cars would have greatly helped the captioning of the book. I am glad that I acquired the book.


gary laakso
south of Mike Brock
vasa0vasa@...


Tim O'Connor
 

Gary

That's a shame about the captions -- Jim certainly is well known on the
freight car mailing lists and could have asked for help on any photos, but
I just checked and I have no practically no saved emails from him for more
than a year, and nothing about tank cars. It's nice to have pictures but
factual information is just as valuable.

The irony is that just a couple weeks ago I printed out a huge errata/addenda
sheet from a 7/12/2000 email from Jim, for the Morning Sun "Pullman Standard
Color Guide" book -- it's 18 pages long!

Tim O'Connor

At 11/23/2010 09:31 PM Tuesday, you wrote:
My copy of Morning Sun's Tank Car Color Guide by James Kinkaid arrived today. It has a wonderful collection of rare color pix, some I noted are: Western Union water car WUTX 4522; 2 UTLX fully enclosed housing tank cars UTLX 85704 and 89525; Linde industrial gas boxcars; 14 pix of 3 dome tank cars; MHAX helium cars; ACFX "chlorine tank cars" , vinegar wooden tank cars: NFPX 22 and SBIX 1678 and many tank cars ( nearly 50%) far too modern for the STMFC era.

The author is perplexed if a car does not have a builders date and the captions do not reveal manufacturers if not painted on the car. For instance, on page 19 there are 2 pictures of Gulf tank cars, WRNX 14132 and 14415, with the last sentence of the caption reading: "Obviously cars from different sources comprised this set. At present the source for these cars remains unknown." The polling pockets on the built up bolsters of 14415 show it is a GATC design.

I few hours with the material discussed in this group concerning identifying tank cars would have greatly helped the captioning of the book. I am glad that I acquired the book.

gary laakso
south of Mike Brock
vasa0vasa@...


tmolsen@...
 

Tim and Gary,

If you sent the corrections for the Morning Sun Books to the authors, perhaps you may see corrections in an errata page, but if they went to the Publisher at Morning Sun, don't hold your breath to ever see a correction.

One of our PRRT&HS members sent a letter to the Publisher advising that there were captioning errors in one of the PRR Facilities books. I saw the letter that was sent and it was factual and asked if the correction cited could be added to the next book as an errata page. The response from the Publisher was scrawled across the returned letter and I quote the answer: "Be thankful we printed the book!"

What a shame that these books depicts a portion of the photographic history of the PRR incorrectly captioned (locations were totally wrong) and will go uncorrected. This is not the first time this book publisher has printed incorrect captions and refused to correct them. Sorry to say, the next generation will take these books with their failings as gospel as there will be no one to correct the historic record.

Tom Olsen
7 Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@...


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tom Olsen wrote:
If you sent the corrections for the Morning Sun Books to the authors, perhaps you may see corrections in an errata page, but if they went to the Publisher at Morning Sun, don't hold your breath to ever see a correction.
What a shame that these books depicts a portion of the photographic history of the PRR incorrectly captioned (locations were totally wrong) and will go uncorrected. This is not the first time this book publisher has printed incorrect captions and refused to correct them. Sorry to say, the next generation will take these books with their failings as gospel as there will be no one to correct the historic record.
The publisher of these books has had this attitude from the very beginning and has never deviated from it. Not only that, he doesn't want "too much history" in captions from authors, the main reason I declined to do more than the first books I had agreed to do. And wished I'd only agreed to do a single book.

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


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

Tony, you and Ed Hawkins are certainly the best people on here to speak to this . . . Publisher's attitudes aside, I've always heard that it was expensive to change a book like this once the galleys or proofs or camera copy (or whatever the correct term is) are created. With a limited print run (as I'm sure these have), perhaps it is just uneconomical to correct them for a subsequent edition that might never come?

(There is always the "Do it right the first time" aspect, but we're talking about a horse that has already left the barn here . . .)

KL

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

Tom Olsen wrote:
If you sent the corrections for the Morning Sun Books to the
authors, perhaps you may see corrections in an errata page, but if
they went to the Publisher at Morning Sun, don't hold your breath to
ever see a correction.
What a shame that these books depicts a portion of the photographic
history of the PRR incorrectly captioned (locations were totally
wrong) and will go uncorrected. This is not the first time this
book publisher has printed incorrect captions and refused to correct
them. Sorry to say, the next generation will take these books with
their failings as gospel as there will be no one to correct the
historic record.
The publisher of these books has had this attitude from the
very beginning and has never deviated from it. Not only that, he
doesn't want "too much history" in captions from authors, the main
reason I declined to do more than the first books I had agreed to do.
And wished I'd only agreed to do a single book.


Stuart A. Forsyth <trainmail@...>
 

I wonder if the PRRT&HS would be willing to maintain the errata sheet somewhere on it's home page. Then, at least, the information would be available to others.

Stuart A. Forsyth
forsyth@...
On Nov 23, 2010, at 10:35 PM, tmolsen@... wrote:

Tim and Gary,

If you sent the corrections for the Morning Sun Books to the authors, perhaps you may see corrections in an errata page, but if they went to the Publisher at Morning Sun, don't hold your breath to ever see a correction.

One of our PRRT&HS members sent a letter to the Publisher advising that there were captioning errors in one of the PRR Facilities books. I saw the letter that was sent and it was factual and asked if the correction cited could be added to the next book as an errata page. The response from the Publisher was scrawled across the returned letter and I quote the answer: "Be thankful we printed the book!"

What a shame that these books depicts a portion of the photographic history of the PRR incorrectly captioned (locations were totally wrong) and will go uncorrected. This is not the first time this book publisher has printed incorrect captions and refused to correct them. Sorry to say, the next generation will take these books with their failings as gospel as there will be no one to correct the historic record.

Tom Olsen
7 Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@...

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


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

That's something I would like to see on here or on a dedicated freight car modeling site (if one ever comes to fuition). The Henderson photo books are universally panned for erroneous captions. It would be great if the people finding errors would start compiling a list of corrections to them. A complete rewrite or exposition on each photo would be too much to ask, but:

Pg 42, top: This series was first built in 5-42, not 5-24.

Pg 8, left: These are 70-ton not 50-ton cars.

would seem to be do-able.

(An example for a tank book: http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/message/1196792071/Errata+list-+Gavin+Birch%27s+%26quot%3BImages+of+War-+Sherman+Tank%26quot%3B)

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim O'Connor

That's a shame about the captions -- Jim certainly is well known on the
freight car mailing lists and could have asked for help on any photos, but
I just checked and I have no practically no saved emails from him for more
than a year, and nothing about tank cars. It's nice to have pictures but
factual information is just as valuable.

The irony is that just a couple weeks ago I printed out a huge errata/addenda
sheet from a 7/12/2000 email from Jim, for the Morning Sun "Pullman Standard
Color Guide" book -- it's 18 pages long!


Gene <bierglaeser@...>
 

Not trying to "top" anyone's story . . .

After the M&StL in Color book was published a reader sent a list of corrections. Most of his corrections were actually wrong but, nonetheless, he expected that Yanosey would re-publish the book with his corrections.

With the C&NW Official Color Photography book another self-appointed expert sent an even longer list of corrections with same re-publish expectation. In his defense, some of his corrections were indeed correct and some few not correct.

Still, business realities dictate otherwise. Unfortunately! I would be happy to admit my errors and correct them in print if possible.

Gene Green


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
Tony, you and Ed Hawkins are certainly the best people on here to speak to this . . . Publisher's attitudes aside, I've always heard that it was expensive to change a book like this once the galleys or proofs or camera copy (or whatever the correct term is) are created. With a limited print run (as I'm sure these have), perhaps it is just uneconomical to correct them for a subsequent edition that might never come?
Not nowadays. The computer files created by the layout person are used to make the printing plates directly, and the "plates" are so thin they can't be re-used. There is no more "camera ready" material and no camera in the process; and there are no longer page negatives used to make the plates. A device which is essentially a laser printer "writes" the pages directly on the emulsion of the plates, which are then developed.
Many of Morning Sun's books are only printed one time, so obviously there is no question of corrections. But in a second or subsequent print run, it would in fact be very easy to correct the computer file. That Yanosey will not do so may mean that he doesn't care (a viable possibility) but it could also mean that he has a specific contract with his printer about doing so.
The Sweetland book on the SP by Morning Sun is filled with "howler" mistakes, wildly wrong locations and wrong trains or eras or historical sidebars. I tell people to look at the photo with their thumb over the caption. Gene Green's comments hopefully do not mean that this has spread as the preferred mode for ALL Moaning Sun products. <g>

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


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Nov 23, 2010, at 10:11 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

That's a shame about the captions -- Jim certainly is well known on
the
freight car mailing lists and could have asked for help on any
photos, but
I just checked and I have no practically no saved emails from him
for more
than a year, and nothing about tank cars. It's nice to have
pictures but
factual information is just as valuable.
Yes, and the trouble is, when unfactual information appears in print,
most readers assume it's gospel truth. As several other list members
have pointed out, the publisher of Jim's book is notorious for being
cavalier about incorrect captions. Kurt Laughlin's suggestion of
collecting corrections to incorrect captions in an archive somewhere
is well intended, but - as others have pointed out - some
"corrections" are themselve, in fact, wrong. So who decides which
corrections are authentic and which ones aren't? In an ideal world,
publishers would make a strong effort to get it right, not just push
contributors for a quick and dirty job done in a hurry to get the
book on the market. One of the most useful functions of the STMFC
list is to warn those of us who care that certain books (like the
Henderson series and many, though not all, of Morning Sun's products)
are seriously inaccurate. And that may be the best we can hope for
in a world which falls far short of ideal.


Richard Hendrickson


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

I would say that the hobby is never going to have an academic peer-review journal process in place. Failing that I guess it depends on reputation. In our less-than-ideal world I would rather have Richard's or Tony's or Ed's or [many others] acknowledged *guess* as to what was right than something clearly wrong, or nothing at all.

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Hendrickson

. . . So who decides which corrections are authentic and which ones aren't? . . .

. . . And that may be the best we can hope for in a world which falls far short of ideal.


Charlie Vlk
 

I still like the book for the pictures.... I don't really trust captions on photos in the vast majority of books but generally the pictures themselves don't lie.... but with Photoshop one never knows......

My main concern with the book (and anothers) is the lack of an index. Also, the coverage seems to be largely cars late in the game. I think there is room for books with more coverage of cars that perhaps won't have Color photos available..... maybe we'll get one or two to complement these that do so and have more accurate captions and an index of at least the car numbers, if not catagorized by type and builder....

Charlie Vlk


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Charlie Vlk wrote:
My main concern with the book (and anothers) is the lack of an index. Also, the coverage seems to be largely cars late in the game. I think there is room for books with more coverage of cars that perhaps won't have Color photos available..... maybe we'll get one or two to complement these that do so and have more accurate captions and an index of at least the car numbers, if not catagorized by type and builder....
Gee, Charlie, there's Ed Kaminski's book on AC&F tank cars, and IT has an index . . .

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


Frederick Freitas <prrinvt@...>
 

GUYZ,

            I have this book and use it as a picture / painting guide to tank
cars. 
It sells as a pictorial, not a history of tank cars. If one is a serious builder
of tank cars; then they already have the Steam Freight Car rafference Manual
vol#2--tank cars by Ted C. The color guide does make a nice companion
piece to Ted's work.

Fred Freitas
Bennington,VT




________________________________
From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wed, November 24, 2010 2:14:08 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Tank Car Color Guide

 
Charlie Vlk wrote:
My main concern with the book (and anothers) is the lack of an
index. Also, the coverage seems to be largely cars late in the
game. I think there is room for books with more coverage of cars
that perhaps won't have Color photos available..... maybe we'll get
one or two to complement these that do so and have more accurate
captions and an index of at least the car numbers, if not
catagorized by type and builder....
Gee, Charlie, there's Ed Kaminski's book on AC&F tank cars, and
IT has an index . . .

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




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


Charlie Vlk
 

Tony-
I just looked, and it doesn't have an index to the Tank Car Color Guide Vol 1...... go figure!!!
Charlie Vlk

Gee, Charlie, there's Ed Kaminski's book on AC&F tank cars, and
IT has an index . . .

Tony Thompson


Tim O'Connor
 

Gene

Believe it or not the best method of getting corrections in
print is something like Wikipedia -- if there was a Wiki page
for each Morning Sun color guide, then people can publish the
corrections -- and the corrections themselves can be corrected!
That's the beauty of the Wiki -- all edits are saved and you
can view any "edition" of the page you want to see. Of course
in this hobby with so many self-appointed 'experts' we might
see some 'Wiki warfare' but it ain't anonymous so everyone can
see who the culprits are, and decide who to believe.

Tim O'Connor

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

Not trying to "top" anyone's story . . .

After the M&StL in Color book was published a reader sent a list of corrections. Most of his corrections were actually wrong but, nonetheless, he expected that Yanosey would re-publish the book with his corrections.

With the C&NW Official Color Photography book another self-appointed expert sent an even longer list of corrections with same re-publish expectation. In his defense, some of his corrections were indeed correct and some few not correct.

Still, business realities dictate otherwise. Unfortunately! I would be happy to admit my errors and correct them in print if possible.

Gene Green


Schuyler Larrabee
 

Galleys? PROOFS? Camera copy? Surely you jest.



These are all completely digital productions, and I have never heard of
Antemeridan Sol reprinting ANY book. Doesn't happen.

SGL



Tony, you and Ed Hawkins are certainly the best people on here to speak to
this . . . Publisher's attitudes aside, I've always heard that it was
expensive to change a book like this once the galleys or proofs or camera
copy (or whatever the correct term is) are created. With a limited print
run (as I'm sure these have), perhaps it is just uneconomical to correct
them for a subsequent edition that might never come?

(There is always the "Do it right the first time" aspect, but we're talking
about a horse that has already left the barn here . . .)

KL

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

Tom Olsen wrote:
If you sent the corrections for the Morning Sun Books to the
authors, perhaps you may see corrections in an errata page, but if
they went to the Publisher at Morning Sun, don't hold your breath to
ever see a correction.
What a shame that these books depicts a portion of the photographic
history of the PRR incorrectly captioned (locations were totally
wrong) and will go uncorrected. This is not the first time this
book publisher has printed incorrect captions and refused to correct
them. Sorry to say, the next generation will take these books with
their failings as gospel as there will be no one to correct the
historic record.
The publisher of these books has had this attitude from the
very beginning and has never deviated from it. Not only that, he
doesn't want "too much history" in captions from authors, the main
reason I declined to do more than the first books I had agreed to do.
And wished I'd only agreed to do a single book.








=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16370)
http://www.pctools.com <http://www.pctools.com/?cclick=EmailFooterClean_51>
=======





=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16370)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======


David Sieber
 

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:
"The irony is that just a couple weeks ago I printed out a huge errata/addenda sheet from a 7/12/2000 email from Jim, for the Morning Sun "Pullman Standard Color Guide" book -- it's 18 pages long!"

Tim, would it be possible for you to post in the STMFC "files" section that 18-page errata/addenda sheet for those of us who also own the Morning Sun "Pullman Standard Color Guide" book? I realize you may want to get Jim's authorization to post it on this site; I would have asked Jim directly, but he's not shown as a STMFC member per member search by last name. If there's that much errata/additional info available, it would be really great to have. Coming from the author, we should be able to trust it, unlike some suspect "corrections" that several members have reported in this and offshoot topic strings...
Thanks in advance, Dave Sieber, Reno NV


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Schuyler Larrabee wrote:
These are all completely digital productions, and I have never heard of Antemeridan Sol reprinting ANY book. Doesn't happen.
You're right about digital, but not about reprinting. Yanosey told me that several of the more popular titles HAVE been reprinted, though I don't know how many times.

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


Tim O'Connor
 

"The irony is that just a couple weeks ago I printed out a huge errata/addenda sheet from a 7/12/2000 email from Jim, for the Morning Sun "Pullman Standard Color Guide" book -- it's 18 pages long!"

Tim, would it be possible for you to post in the STMFC "files" section that 18-page errata/addenda sheet for those of us who also own the Morning Sun "Pullman Standard Color Guide" book? I realize you may want to get Jim's authorization to post it on this site; I would have asked Jim directly, but he's not shown as a STMFC member per member search by last name. If there's that much errata/additional info available, it would be really great to have. Coming from the author, we should be able to trust it, unlike some suspect "corrections" that several members have reported in this and offshoot topic strings...
Thanks in advance, Dave Sieber, Reno NV

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

Dave, I was going to say it's online for anyone to see -- but the old Freightcars list
archive has disappeared! I downloaded most of it years ago -- there was a tremendous
amount of really good stuff posted there, and also to rec.models.railroad (remember that?)

Anyway, here is Jim's post of 7/12/2000 to the old Freightcars mailing list. Please note
that most but not all of the comments pertain to freight cars built after 1960.

Tim O'Connor

=========================================================================================
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
=========================================================================================

From: "Kinkaid, James A" <JAKinkaid@...>
To: <freightcars@...>
Subject: [FC] PS Color Guide update
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 17:41:12 -0500

This is the update to my Pullman-Standard Color Guide published by Morning
Sun books. These individual sections are keyed to the pages and cars noted
within the book.

It was generated in 1996, but hasn't been added to since. Perhaps someone
will find something of interest.

Page 4. Per the Pullman-Standard Carbuilder magazine, the PS-3 open
top hopper design was introduced in 1948. (Ed.)

Page 5. According the the Carbuilder, Hammond supplied all of
Pullmans box car parts needs. "Out of Hammond come all the major box car
parts-P-S underframes, roofs, sides, ends, nailable steel flooring,
hydraulic cushion units, plug and sliding doors..." In addition Hammond
also was set up to rebuild Trailer Train flatcars and perform car
stretching. (Ed.)

Actually, to make the Pullman-Standard list complete, the passenger
car works can be broken down as follows:
Pullman Car Works, Pullman IL, built 1881
General Office building, Pullman IL, built 1882 through 1884
Canal Street Storehouse, Chicago IL, built 1903
Repair Shops, St. Louis MO, built 1880
Repair Shops, Wilmington DE, built 1886
Repair Shops, Calumet IL, built 1901
Repair Shops, Richmond CA, built 1909
(A Century of Pullman Cars, Ralph L. Barger, Greenburg
Publishing 1988)

Although a short history of Pullman was published in a later
Carbuilder and used as the basis for the introduction, probably the best
all-round history of the company that I've seen was published in the
Carbuilder back in the Marcg 1955 issue. It was superb. (Ed.)

Page 7. ACY 1767: Conventional terminology would be to refer to the
9' sliding door as the main door and the 6' plug door as the auxillary door.
The doors on double-door cars were usually arranged so that the door to the
right of the door opening would have to be opened first, and therefore
called the main door. The door to the left could only be opened after the
door to the right was opened. Cars with a centered sliding main door and an
offset plug auxillary door, such as ACY 1767 and 2283 and the ABOX cars,
were usually intended to be used primarily as single-door cars. Use of a
plug, rather than sliding, auxillary door permitted lading to be loaded
against the plug door, thereby retaining the same loading capability as a
single-door car. Lading could not be loaded against as auxillary sliding
door unless as auxiliary door post and DF door bars were used-obviously a
more complicated arrangement. (Dick Dawson)

Page 9. ACL 500000: The terminology used to describe weight
capacity has always been somewhat confusing. It sometimes refers to an
approximation of its actual weight carrying capability and at other times to
the axle size of the trucks with which a car is equipped.

The true weight carrying capability of a car is the load limit, as
stencilled on the side of the car. This is derived by subtracting the
actual light weight of the car from the gross rail load rating (GRL) of the
axles on the car. Thus a typical grain covered hopper car with a light
weight of 63,000 lbs. and 6-1/2" x 12" journal axles would have a load limit
of 200,000 lbs., or 100 tons. this is derived by 263,000 (GRL for four
6-1/2" x 12" axles) minus 63,000 light weight=200,000. Light weights and
load limits are rounded to the nearest 100 lbs. Each car in an order will
have its own load limit which is determined by its actual light weight. The
stencilled capacity is to be no less than the load limit and is expressed in
even 1000 lbs. It can be thought of as kind of a "minimum load limit",
since the car owner would often want to have the same capacity for all the
cars in a given group.

Commonly, cars equipped with four 6-1/2" x 12" axles are called
"100-ton cars", even though the load limit may be as small as 150,000 lbs.
for an 86' box car or as much as 220,000 lbs. for an aluminum coal car.
Prior to 1962, cars with four 5-1/2" x 10" axles were rated for 169,000 lbs.
GRL and were commonly called "55-ton". In 1962, the allowable gross rail
loads for all axle sizes were increased by about 5%, with 5-1/2" x 10" axles
then being rated for 177,000 lbs. Although they were then officially called
"55-ton" cars, requently they are still referred to as "50-ton".
Similarly, nominal 70-ton cars, equipped with four 6" x 11" axles, had their
GRL increased from 210,000 to 220,000 lbs. Although their nominal capacity
theoretically was increased to 77-tons, more commonly they were still called
"70-ton cars". The relatively small number of cars equipped with four
6-1/2" x 12" axles before 1962 had been rated at 251,000 lbs. GRL and were
usually called "90-ton" cars. Many cars built with 6-1/2" x 12" axles are
now being rated at 286,000 lbs. and are sometimes referred to as "110-ton
cars". Cars with four 7" x 12" axles (7" x 14" journals with solid
bearings) were rated at 300,000 lbs. GRL before 1963. They are now rated at
315,000 lbs. and are typically referred to as "125-ton" cars. In all these
cases, even though a car might sometimes be referred to by capacity value
that more accurately reflects its weight carrying capactiy, the trucks and
truck components are almost universally referred to by the nominal ratings
of "50-ton", "70-ton", etc.

In the case of ACL 500000, the reference to it as a "135-ton" car is
a better description of its actual 271,500 lb. load limit than is "150-ton",
which would be based on its having six 6-1/1" x 12" axles. The fact that
this car never achieved commercial success is not very surprising. Six-axle
trucks are really effective only when there is no other way to obtain
satisfactory capacity. As a rough indication, a six-wheel truck weighs
about twice as much and costs twice as much as a four-wheel truck with the
same axle size. Although they are sometimes useful for heavy-duty and
depressed-center flat cars, three conventional cars with four-wheel trucks
are usually more cost-effective than two cars with six-wheel trucks. (Dick
Dawson)

This car was either called the Tenelon or the Whopper Hopper,
depending on who does the talking. Pullman's production records and
Carbuilder magazine both refer to it as the Tenelon. The word Tenelon was
(and probably still is) a trademark of U.S. Steel for a stainless steel
type. Per the Carbuilder, these ASF six-wheel trucks were the first of that
particular type to be used in interchange servce.
Apparently this car got around. In the August 1966 issue of the
Carbuilder it showed this car being loaded with stoker coal at Balkan, KY
for shipment to the Tampa Electric Company at Sutton, FL. The issue also
said that the car had been in trial service carrying soybeans, phosphate
rock, di-ammonium phosphate, corn, feed and vermiculite. No doubt the
internal steam-cleaning provisions came in handy. (Ed.)

Page 10. ACL 89134: Depending on the type of grain to be carried or
the policy of the railroad, many grain covered hopper cars were given no
interior lining. Unless it was a standard on the ACL, the use of Polyclutch
lining does not necessarily imply use in grain service. (Dick Dawson)

Page 11. ACL 28809: Did you notice that this 2/68 build date is
actually over a year after the SCL merger? It's surprising that these cars
showed up like this at all, since my 10/67 ORER shows that the renumbering
scheme was already in place by that time (it shows the ACL series--a case
where the photo is far more useful than the ORER!). (Carl Shaver)

This car certainly represents one of very few groups of 40' box cars
built with outside-post side construction and one of very few 40' box cars
built as late as 1968. (Dick Dawson)

Page 14. ATSF cars unloading: The Carbuilder claims that these 4427
potash-loaded cars can empty in about 3 minutes, assuming all three outlets
are wide open. (Ed.)

Page 15. ATSF 37287: Note that although these cars were equipped
with nominal 70-ton trucks, the load limit of ATSF 37287, and therefore its
carrying capacity, is just barely 65 tons (220,000 GRL-89,900 LT WT=130,100
LD LMT). Also, the use of Keystone cushioning on these cars is not as
surprising as it may seem. The cushioning system supplied by Keystone is in
fact the same Shock Control system, produced under license from the original
inventors, although their patents are no longer used in the current Keystone
units. (Dick Dawson)

Page 16. ATSF 37625: Although the AAR Plate E clearance diagram was
in fact based on the 60' box cars used in Fisher Body and other General
Motors auto parts services, it did not exist at the time these cars were
built. On the Penn Central, we generally referred to such cars as "Exceeds
Plate C". The capacities of "6516 cu.ft. or 70-tons" are not really
equivelant. The 6516 cu.ft. value is calculated from the interior length,
width and height whereas the 70 tons figure is the nominal capacity of the
trucks. The actual load limit is closer to 65 tons. (Dick Dawson)

Page 18. B&LE 2004: Pullman developed several longitudinal hopper
doors which were intended to speed the unloading process today on many unit
train coal cars. These doors were expensive to build and had reliability
problems. They therefore were not big sellers. (Dick Dawson)

Page 21. BN 526406: Although BN did acquire rotary dump gondolas for
unit train coal service, they also acquired bottom-drop hopper cars as well.
While they were used primarily in rotary dump service, the BN wanted, as you
suggest, to have the capability of using some of the cars in bottom-drop
service if required. I have been told that some of these cars never
actually dropped loads though the hoppers and that the doors rusted in place
to the extent that it became virtually impossible to open them. (Dick
Dawson)


Page 22. PTTX 92251: It was my experience that nearly all of the
PTTX cars were lettered for the B&O (though I see from photos later on that
some apparently weren't, at least not originally). Some of the B&O-lettered
cars were later changed to C&O, though I'm pretty sure that no PTTX cars
were ever lettered C&O originally. (Carl Shaver)

George McNally, formerly in the engineering department at Pullman-
told me that this car has a bulkhead design that was reinforced, especially
at the attachment to the carbody, compared to that used on PTTX 90594 and
91922, shown on page 115. (Dick Dawson)

Page 23. CofG 8818: The 86' high cube box cars were commonly
described as having 10,000 cu.ft. cubic capacity. However, variations in
interior dimensions based on different rub rails, bulkhead tracks, etc.
could result in different values for cubic capacity even though the basic
car shell was identical. (Dick Dawson)

(True, but the car's engineering design was built to 10,000 cu.ft.
Any accounting for interior loading equipment should detract from the design
cubic capacity, not increase it. If the car is accurately stencilled, then
this would imply that the car's design was actually somewhat greater that
10,000 cu.ft., meaning that the drawings and all of the railroad diagram
sheets and technical specifications that I have seen so far are in error-an
unlikly event. Even utilizing the high cube cars actual stencilling
produces a volume of 10109 cu.ft. The question still remains-how did this
car acquire "additional" volume? Ed.)

Page 27. CP/CPAA: The statement about cars lettered CPAA being
restricted to international service is the truth, but it isn't the whole
truth (cars lettered CPI had this restriction as well). The CPAA also
signified that the cars were in fact built in the USA. As for the 205500
series, my 4/66 ORER shows the series lettered CP (none yet existed,
obviously), but by 10/67 they were lettered CPAA. I have an AAR Pocket List
dated April 1, 1967, and it shows series 205500-205803 under both CP and
CPAA reporting marks. The rule or whatever that required these special
reporting marks must have come in at the beginning of 1967 or thereabouts.
(Carl Shaver)

Page 29. C&O 23296: It looks like it says XML on the picture, but
these cars spent most of their careers designated as XMLI (fitting since
they were insulated cars). The yellow paint scheme signified that (C&O
itself built some similar looking non-insulated box cars that were blue,
with yellow lettering and end doors). (Carl Shaver)

The "DFB" designation was used by Evans Products, suppliers of the
DF1 and DF2 belt rails and crossbar systems, to refer to their movable
bulkhead systems. (Dick Dawson)

Page 29. C&O 26076: The mundane brown paint scheme was
significant--it indicated that the car was non-cushioned (it would have been
blue if it were cushioned), and non-equipped (had it been anything but XM,
or restricted to special service, it would have been black). (Carl Shaver)

Page 30. CB&Q 19825: Appliances had traditionally been carried in
40' box cars with DF1 or DF2 belt rails and crossbars. These cars represent
an attempt to update that car with the higher roof to carry an additional
level of appliances. As you state, this approach did not generate much
interest. The favored approach turned out to be the 60' high roof box car,
developed by the New York Central marketing department. The first car built
was a prototype, PC 278949, delivered under lot 151-B at East Rochester
shortly after the PC merger. Although equipped with both DF1 belt rails and
Air-Pak pneumatic bulkheads, test loads showed that the air bag bulkheads in
combination with hydraulic cushioning were sufficient to hold the lading in
place. The first production orders were the 270 X64 cars built in 1968 and
1969 at Samuel Rea Shops in Hollidaysburg (for which I did the design work).
They were equipped with air bag bulkheads and flat rub rails only, but no
belt rails or crossbars. By the late 1970's, appliance cars were built with
outside post construction rather than inside post and with end-of-car
cushioning rather than sliding sill, but the 60' high roof configuration
remained. (Dick Dawson)

The Carbuilder also had this article on these cars:
"Newest in a long line of P-S box cars is the 40-foot
hi-cube car being produced at the Bessemer (Ala.) plant. This new design of
low density high volume car, ordered by several railroads to serve the
household appliance industry, emphasizes the fast-moving changes taking
place in distribution patterns.
"Ordering 40-foor 6-inch long box cars on the basis of acheiving
economies seems, at first glance, a strange development in view of recent
buying trends. For some time railroads and shippers, interested in securing
revenue-producing rail giants, have leaned more and more towards cars of
increased cubic capacity and longer lengths. An excess height hi-cube car
86-feet 6-inches long, for example, brings in two and a half times the
revenue of a 40-foot long standard box car.
"However, consignees of household appliances such as washing
machines, dryers, and refrigerators pointed out that only 40 feet of a
50-foot 6-inch box car is utilized in shipping their products. And out of
discussions by customers and P-S marketing people came the idea of a 40-foot
hi-cube car.
"The new design of "baby hi-cube," so-called to differentiate
between it and its 86-foot big brother, is newsworthy on several counts.
"The new box car, basically built to the P-S flexible
standardization concept, is actually a customized unit through the
availability of optional equipment and design features.
"Production of nine groups of cars for five different railroads
meant that many variables were involved. The result was that many areas had
to be re-checked by engineering.
"One variable was the special underframe required because of the
utilization of P-S Hydroframe-40 built-in cushioning, a first where the
40-foot car is concerned.
"Center sill types differed. Three railroads ordered 50-ton cars
with 5 1/2 x 10" journals; the others called for 70-ton cars with 6 x 11"
journals, necessitating a check of clearances.
"Interior equipment varied according to railroad demands. The
number and types of belt rails differed. Some cars had bulkheads, others
none. Material thicknesses varied due to draft gear.
"Different installations on the small number of cars involve in each
lot not only posed problems for engineering but for manufacturing and
purchasing as well."
"Traffic was responsible for seeing that P-S sliding doors,
fabricated at the Hammond, Indiana, facility, were shipped to Bessemer in
time for application to cars in line." (Ed.)

Page 31. CB&Q 10218: These cars were not stencilled with the Plate C
symbol inside a square box because they exceeded it. It is surprising,
however, that they do not carry the "Exceeds Plate C" symbol inside a
circle. Although I had thought that perhaps that symbol had not yet been
established by the AAR, it can be seen on NYC 56481 (page 68) that the
symbol was already in use by 1966. (Dick Dawson)

Page 32. CNW 160000: Have you got photos for all three of the lots
in this order? If so, maybe you could tell us for sure whether they were
all XLs when built. From my observations, I think they were, but Eric
Neubauer doesn't agree with that (I know that some were later redesignated
XM to take advantage of some special ruling). (Carl Shaver)

(Unfortunately, I do not believe that there are any photographs for
lot 9381A. Ed.)

The caption states that these cars were built at the two plants due
to the fact that the order was so large. While this was true, the primary
reason for the production split was that the CNW had to have the cars by
March 1, 1969. Because of the size of the order and the time constraints,
production was split. This was a large order costing more than $30 million.
(Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 35. DRGW 51083: North American Car was not the only independent
car builder to use Pullman-Standard car parts for new car production. The
Evans Company built a considerable portion of their 5100 cu.ft. RBL "Blue
Island Refers" using Pullman-supplied ends and roofs. (Ed.)

Page 35. DRGW 67420: The reduction in cubic capacity is more likely
caused by the intrusion of the load divider ceiling tracks into the inside
height than by the thickness of the load dividers themselves, which was
generally subtracted from the inside length of the car. (See my note on
page 23. Ed) It is interesting to compare the stencilled markings of this
car with those of DRGW 67429, shown below it. The values shown for inside
length, inside width and inside height are the same for both cars, but the
cubic capacity is different. Something is not kosher here. (Dick Dawson)

Page 36. TLDX 13288: Close examination shows that the large logo was
painted directly on the sides (look how it wraps over the side posts) rather
than on a seperate plate. (Dick Dawson)

Page 36. EL 63404: These were ordinary general purpose cars.
According the the June 1968 Carbuilder: "Specifically requested by the
railroad, the cars were ordered to help ease a shortage of box cars, largely
due to two factors. Approximately 85 percent of all cars produced in the
past decade have been special type cars for specific needs. Too, large
numbers of cars have been scrapped." (Ed.)

Page 39. GN 172364: In actuality the GN ordered 600 cars at the same
time. The car shown in the photo was from the first order and came with
regular trough hatches. The second lot, for an additional 150 cars,
featured a quite different roof line: six round hatches centered down the
roof verses either trough or the more usual ten circular hatch options.
This was due to the fact that these cars had to be able to carry either
grain or aluminum. The last order was for an additional 300 regular
trough-hatch equipped cars. The 450 trough-hatch equipped cars were for
grain service only. (Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 42. IC 12077: Actually this car was part of a much larger
623-car order. The other 523 cars only had four belt rails per car and were
in a seperate number series. These cars came off the assembly line at the
rate of 20 per day. (Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 45. KCS boxcars: These cars featured the first application of
Pullman's new plug door. It was a lightweight cam-operated design built at
Hammond (as were all of Pullman's doors). The doors were designed to be
built with either steel, aluminum or reinforced plastic and up to 14' x 14'.
It would appear that the plug door design never really went much of
anywhere. The KCS boxcar orders shown on this page and on page 46 represent
almost the only known orders for this design, though the Southern and L&N
also got some. The Pullman-designed lightweight sliding door fared a bit
better, but not by much. (Ed.)


Page 48. L&N 188137: The primary diffulcity with all-welded hopper
car sides was not so much that they were more difficult to replace as that
they required replacement much sooner. The NYC cars you mention were built
by a number of builders. I have sometimes referred to these cars as an
equal opportunity disaster. All suffered from early development of cracks
at the connection between the side posts and the side sheets at the bottom.
When subjected to mechanical shakers during unloading, these cracks soon
grew to the point that the bottom of the post came loose from the side sill
angle. Although it is not impossible to design a satisfactory welded-side
hopper car, it is considerably more difficult. A similar problem occured
with welded side gondola cars. The Pennsylvania Railroad learned this
lesson earlier than the Central and, after unsatisfactory experience with
the H37 hoppers and G31 to G36 gondolas, used riveted side construction for
future cars. The mechanical fasteners used at the bolsters and crossridges
of L&N 188137 may have been intended to alleviate these problems. (Dick
Dawson)

(Not true-at least in the Pullman design. Roger Brinkman, the
senior tooling estimator and very knowledgeable about how Pullman's cars
were constructed, said that the mechanical fasteners were used simply
because it was almost impossible to get the welding equipment up under these
assemblies. Otherwise, with Pullman's insistance on welding most
everything, these cars would have been truly all-welded. Ed)

Page 49. L&N 184837: The L&N is one of very few railroads that were
still buying 70-ton (nominal truck capacity, not actual weight capacity) as
late as 1970. Although stencilling directly over weathering steel such as
US Steel's Cor Ten (a big favorite, not surprisingly, on US Steel-owned
B&LE) was very appealing, it turned out that iron oxide washed off by rain
from the steel above would stain the stencilling to the point that it became
difficult to read. The B&LE then called for painting the side panels on
which stencils were to be applied. Even though less paint was used compared
to painting the entire car, the additional labor required to mask the
painted from unpainted areas resulted in very little money being saved.
(Dick Dawson)

Page 51. L&N 3991: The use of sliding sill cushioning on an 89' flat
car with a fish belly center sill was a very unsatisfactory arrangement.
Access to the cushioning device was very difficult and these cars ended up
being retired rather early. (Dick Dawson)

Page 54. L&N 101033: The L&N Magazine from November 1963 had this to
say about this car, which was at a trade and exhibit show: "ITEM: How can a
service-weary 1940-vintage box be "stretched" and remade into a like-new,
efficient piece of rolling stock to meet the needs of 1963's shippers? L&N
Boxcar No. 101033, a 50-foot, 70-ton cushioned underframe boxcar, was
visible proof that such magic can be done-and almost as a matter of routine.
In the Pullman-Standard exhibits, this "box" is one of nearly 1100 such L&N
cars now being upgraded and lengthened with parts from that firm's parts and
service division. No. 101033 was painted (at Pullman-Standard according to
the caption in the attendent photo in the article) in different colors to
show how the upgrading was done." (Steve Johnson and the L&NHS)

Page 55. L&N 105044: That door certainly looks more like a
Youngstown (Camel) Type 47 roller lift door to me than a pullman door.
Pullman's sliding door design started out being very close to the Creco
(Superior) door and, although it got closer and closer to the Youngstown
door over the years, it never got that close! (Dick Dawson)

(Dick Dawson is correct-the error is mine. However, Pullman did
manufacture a large number of doors for Youngstown to their design at
Hammond. But Pullman did field a close looking design in an aluminum door,
not used on too many cars judging from the photo collection. Ed.)

(The photo caption at the bottom of the page has a slightly
incorrect error: this L&N boxcar is arriving at Houston from its first
journey. Ed)

Page 56. Monon 15034: These cars were actually individually assigned
to on-line elevators on the Monon system. When not in use they were kept in
storage near the elevators they were assigned to. (Mont Switzer)

Page 58. MILW 2150: These cars were supposed to have nine belts, but
only eight are visible in the doorway area. I suppose that the ninth might
be above the doorway although the diagram sheet might be incorrect. (Ed.)

Page 61. MI 714218: These cars were in fact the very first 4740
cuft. PS-2CD cars delivered, (TLDX 9000, on page 107 was not delivered
insofar as we can tell and was only a R&D car). Obviously a milestone in
Pullman's covered hopper car production, this series also represented
several other important milestones for the company.
Because Pullman-Standard was getting ready to greatly expand its
production capabilities, an entirely new production line was established.
Known as "aisle 4" this line was more than 1100 feet long and was designed
to help Butler produce a total of 45 cars a day. Beyond this, the entire
assembly process was redesigned completely to allow for the nearly instant
changeover from one model of PS-2 to another. This proved to be a great
asset, as Pullman cataloged numerous models and ran several types of cars in
production at the same time. An example of how busy Pullman-Standard was at
this plant is indicated by the following figures given in the Carbuilder:
"Purchasing thinks "big." In terms of building 45 cars a day, 45 carloads
of material-steel, wheels, axles, trucks, etc.-must be on hand.
Approximately 22 tons of steel are required for one car alone. Multiply
these figures by 400, the number of cars in the Missouri-Pacific order, (the
MI 4740 cars. Ed.) and an idea can be had of the magnitude of purchasing's
task. In fact, Pullman-Standard is the largest user of steel in western
Pennsylvania."
The PS-2 was getting ever more popular: the very day that production
started on the MI 4740 cars, the Santa Fe placed an order for 2500 4427
PS-2CD cars and the ACL ordered another 1000 cars of 2929 cu.ft. design.
(Ed.)

Page 63. MP 272018: The 86' box cars with two door openings per side
were used in General Motors service, generally Chevrolet or Oldsmobile.
Ford and Chrysler used similar cars with only one door opening per side. In
all cases, two 10' wide plug doors were used at each door opening. (Dick
Dawson)

Page 63. MP 706101: Actually this car was known to Pullman as a
PS-2SD. The SD stood for Side Discharge. After the 4000 cu.ft and above
trough hatch-equipped cars appeared, everything was known as either center
discharge (CD) or side discharge (SD). (Ed.)

Page 64. MANX 1016: Although Trailer Train does use the F89C class
designation, it is for a car that differs from this. To TTX, an F89C is an
early Pullman-built 89' low level flat car with 5'-1" wheel base trucks
(like MDAX 1337 shown below). MANX 1016 is a standard-level car and,
although I can't read the capacity stencilling, appears to have 100-ton
trucks. (Dick Dawson)

The Pullman Carbuilder had this to say about these interesting cars:
"Now seeing service are 91 flat cars built for Insulite, a
division of Boise Cascade Corporation, by Pullman-Standard.
"The 89-footers, reflecting current shipper thinking, were
produced through the combined efforts of our Butler (Pa.) and Hammond (Ind.)
plants. Butler built the cars and shipped them to Hammond for application
of the bulkheads which were fabricated at the Indiana plant. One bulkhead
is fixed, the other movable.
"The cars, unique in the building products industry, are
used to transport Insulite building products. They are representative of
prevailing, realistic attitudes on the part of both rails and shippers;
i.e.; in order to remain competitive it is necessary to minimize costs and
maximize profits though utilization of rail equipment peculiar to specific
needs.
"The Insulite Terminal System, for instance, is seeking to
provide the best possible distribution services for wholesalers and dealer
customers. In short, their goal is that of "bringing the factory to the
market place."
"To achieve this, the company has set up four distribution
points located in primary market areas: Woodbridge, New Jersey; South St.
Paul, Minnesota; Chicago, Illinois; Kansas City, Missouri.
"The new P-S built cars, making up approximately half of the
Insulite fleet used in this operation, move in 8-car blocks (one million
pound trains). This operation speeds up service and reduces the number of
lost cars. Loading time too is speeded up and dealers receive shipments
ready for mechanized handling." (Ed.)

Page 66. NYC 67021: Although it is difficult to see form this photo,
NYC 667021, like all Greenville-built 86' box cars, uses riveted side
construction. (Dick Dawson)

Page 69. NYC 886984: Although the Penn Central H54's were also built
without continuous center sills, their construction at the ends of the cars,
particularly at the end sill, differed in several respects. (Dick Dawson)

(True. Most of the 4785 cu.ft cars built were delivered with large
vertical end sheets just above the strikers. Ed.)

The Carbuilder had this article on these New York Central 4785
cu.ft. cars:
""Think big" well could be the slogan of the Butler (Pa.)
plant, producer of the largest PS-2CDs introduced by Pullman-Standard to
date. The newest in the covered hopper line, a center sill-less model, the
car has a capacity of 4785 cubic feet.
"The first 200 cars to roll out of Butler were for the New York
Central. Designed especially for dry bulk lading, they are equipped with a
continuous sectionalized trough hatch.
"One of the largest PS-2CDs built to date, the car is not the first
with the "no center sill" feature. The first center sill-less cars, 4475s,
were built at Butler last year (1966-Ed.) after the installation of new
production facilities in aisle four.
"The new 4785 cubic foot capacity cars basically are 4740 PS-2CDs.
Other than a very short lead time tooling up for the NYC production run,
following completion of an order of 4740s, presented few problems. Teamwork
enabled the engineers to provide the data needed in time to meet schedule
commitments.
"The NYC cars were followed by 100 4785s built for the Southern
Pacific (actually the Cotton Belt-Ed.)
"Special requirements on the part of the Southern Pacific, coupled
with an extremely short lead time, constituted a challange to production,
engineering, and purchasing.
"Major differences between the Southern Pacific cars and the first
center sill-less covered hopper included a one-piece side sheet as opposed
to a seven-piece side sheet; a stainless steel discharge tube and sanitary
cap; bolt-on non-ferrous discharge gate; "beefed-up" side sills (due to the
"no center sill" feature)." (Ed.)

Page 70. NS 5001: NS 5000-5099 were in fact relettered USEX in 1974.
Some of these went on to become TRAX 5600-5639 in 1989; those cars later
became ITLX 30500-30539. (Carl Shaver)

Page 71. N&W 355105: Although it cannot be seen in this photo, the
bulkhead tracks of 86' box cars rarely extended for the full length of the
car. As I recall, the track length was typically about 32'. (Dick Dawson)

Page 72. N&W 32000: The long extension of the striker out beyond the
end sill clearly indicates that this car is equipped with sliding sill
cushioning, probably of 20" travel. Note that the lot number, 8802D, is the
same except for the "D" suffix as the lot for the L&N cars shown on page 51.
(Dick Dawson)

(Dick is correct. I made the mistake of using diagram sheets for
caption data, not thinking to really look at the photograph. It is readily
apparent to all that the car has cushioning, just observe the coupler
release rod: this type was only used on long-travel systems. Besides, I
knew that the two lots were produced together and typically when Pullman
assigned suffixes to lots everything was the same on seperate sublots,
insofar as the basics of the car structures were concerned [though interior
furnishing often differred greatly]. Ed.)

Page 73. TLDX 13289: Judging by the solid steel floor sheet between
the bolster and the end sill, I suspect that these cars were built without
continuous center sills (like TLDX 13288 on page 36 and the NYC 4785 cu.ft.
cars on page 69). The center sill-less design was intended to compete with
ACF's Center Flo design which was very popular for some commodities whose
flow during unloading could be impeded by the center sill in the hopper.
For the more common commodities like grain, few railroads were willing to
pay a premium over Pullman's more conventional design. (Dick Dawson)

(The 4475 cu.ft design was in fact a center sill-less design, and
according to Pullman information actually an offshoot of the 4427 cu.ft
PS-2. Nearly every PS2-CD had an offshoot center sill-less varient. With
the exception of the larger plastics cars, few sold in any quantities. [I
have been catalogueing data on all of the Pullman built, proposed and
experimental PS-2 designs for future publication--Pullman worked on a large
number of distinct car types]. Ed.)

Page 75. PC 295506: With the exception of a few recent orders,
almost all previous 86' box cars had been built with sliding sill
cushioning. By 1968 when these cars were ordered, however, it was becoming
apparent that the additional maintenance expense of sliding sill cushioning
did not justify the slight improvement in lading protection compared to
end-of-car cushioning. Indeed, Penn Central had already taken delivery in
1968 and earlier in 1969 of 86' cars from both Thrall and Greenville with
15" and 10" travel Freightmaster cushioning. Very few, if any, 86' box cars
built after these cars were equipped with sliding sill cushioning.
Incidentally, I performed the design review and checked the drawings for
this group of cars which, as was usually the case, included cars for several
other railroads. This was to prove very valuable when, less than a year
later, we built 154 86' box cars to our own design at Samuel Rea Shops.
(Dick Dawson)

Page 76. PRR 125605: All the early 86' box cars were equipped with
70-ton trucks and the very low weight of the auto stampings they typically
carried rarely utilized the available load limit. Ford, however, felt that
some loads might require additional capacity and after about 1968 specified
100-ton trucks on cars built for their service. Soon all 86' cars were
built with 100-ton trucks. (Dick Dawson)

Page 79. RBOX 15000: This is a photograph of an "imposter". As far
as I can tell, this is a car built for another owner, probably Southern
Railway, that was temporarily painted to demonstrate the paint scheme that
was to be used by the Railbox subsidiary of Trail Train Company. There was
an RBOX 15000, class XPF11, built by Pullman-Standard under lot 9831, but it
was built 8-12-75 and had several differences in construction compared to
this car. The first Pullman-built RBOX car actually looked more like the
car in the photo, but it was built 1-13-75 under lot 9794 and was an XPF10
numbered RBOX 14001. (RBOX 14000 was accepted a few days later). (Dick
Dawson)

Page 80. TLDX 2: The caption is wrong of course, this car is
TLCX-marked. Apparently this car was not intended for revenue or
interchange service. Notice that the wheels have been painted green,
something that the AAR does not allow. This car surely would gave been
sidelined at the first inspection point. (Ed.)

Page 80. REX 6192: Believe it or not, this car was indeed painted in
this odd green color. Several transparencies exist of this car, and all
show the same hue. (Ed.)

Page 81. RSP cars: It would seem that I made a blunder here. These
cars were actually ordered for the grocery trade, not lumber service as I
claimed. They were specially lined and in more recent times probably would
have qualified as AAR class "XF". (Ed.)

Page 82. RDG 19391: I am not sure what the Reading Railroad class
designation was, but by this time the AAR mechanical designation XML
(general service box car-XM-equipped with loader equipment-L) had been
simplified to XL. Note that XL is stencilled on the car after the CAPY. At
the same time, the designation XAP (box car-X-equipped for Auto Parts) was
shortened to XP. (Dick Dawson)

Page 85. RI 33195: In the late 1960's, the Pennsylvania and later
Penn Central railroads used a standard underframe for the 60' box cars built
at Samuel Rea Shop. It was rated for 100-ton loadings but was also used for
cars equipped with 70-ton trucks. During a time when both 70-ton and
100-ton cars used 14" diameter center plates (100-ton cars now typically use
16" center plates), using the same underframe when cars of both capacities
were being built both simplified construction and provided the capability to
later upgrade the capacity of 70-ton cars. I suspect that the same approach
was being used with these Rock Island cars. (Dick Dawson)

Page 91. SCL 80000: These cars represented several firsts for
Pullman. They were the very first waffle-sided cars built by Pullman.
(Actually, the term "waffle-side" was trademarked by Pullman-Standard.)
Also they were the first SCL cars to employ all P-S hook and eye brake
rigging. As an additional item of interest, the car posts were ventilated
at the tops. This was so that the cars could carry hot cargo such as wood
pulp in its warm stage. (Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 94. SOU 75047: Besides the twelve unloading gates or outlets,
they also used 50-degree slope sheets. These were specifically incorporated
to facilite fast unloading. (Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 98. SP 65050: Although coupler centering devices were not very
successful and were eventually discontinued, many of the 86' box cars shown
in the book were equipped with them. In addition to the fact that they
required a great deal of maintenance, there were times, such as when the car
was on a curve, that the coupler needed to be off center in order to couple
with another car. (Dick Dawson)

(Also see page 123 for more comments on these devices. Ed.)

Page 99. SLSF 9512: Along with the UP cars on page 117 these were
the first foam-in-place cars built by Pullman. According to the Carbuilder
they were used to transport drugs and medicines among other products. These
type loads did not really need the insulation and the cars were apprently
ordered for future use in other areas where the insulation was necessary.
(Ed.)

Page 99. SLSF 79000: We still do not know just who actually built
the car. I used drawings from this lot to help out with my scale drawings
of this style car in Mainline Modeler and they clearly stated Bessemer next
to the car series on the general arrangement drawing. However, the drawings
were also valid for several other lots, all of which were Butler-built cars.
So the question still remains: did Butler build the parts and Bessemer
simply assemble them or did Bessemer build them from scratch? Also, I have
not located any other 4427 cu.ft. PS-2 cars that were built outside of
Butler other than the SLSF cars shown here (and on page 116) and 236 car
sets of 4427 cars for North American. The North American car sets were
fabricated by Butler however. (Ed.)

Page 102. TLCX 17: Although we still do not know what lot this car
was from or any further production information about this strange car, new
information has surfaced as to its function. This car was specially painted
in a "paisly" print for Pullman-Standard's first advertisement in a new ad
program. The advertisement stressed that no matter what color you desired
your boxcar delivered in, Pullman would offer "as many options as there are
standard parts." (Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 104. TLCX 42: Besides the fact the the caption heading is
obviously mismarked, the Carbuilder indicated that ten cars went to the CP
and ten to the CN, all for service between Canadian newsprint producers and
U.S. publishers. This publication also indicated that both sets of cars
were painted grey overall with the CN cars having bright yellow stencilling
while the CP cars had white stencilling. They were all wood-lined and has a
built-in nylon strap securement system. Also, this set of cars was the
first nine-foot plug door to be applied to a non-insulated car by
Pullman-Standard. (Ed.)

Page 104. TLDX 91: The Carbuilder indicated that 3,000 bushels of
shelled corn could be loaded in one of these cars in 12 minutes. (Ed.)

Page 107. TLDX 4: It appears to me that the car was in fact equipped
with two Pullman tractor-operated trailer hitches which are in the retracted
position. Notice the grease on the hitch top plates, one located about 10
ft. from the "B" end and one just beyond the folding container pedestals at
the center of the car. The trailer bridge plates (aluminum, no less) were
only needed for TOFC service. (Dick Dawson)

Page 107. TLDX 9000: This was in fact the very first car off the
newly laid 4740 production line. It likely never was sold as it was
extensively modified for testing. It is interesting to note that those
"ridges" pressed into the middle of the side panels also appeared on the
original drawings for the 4427 high-sided car, which was also put into
production at this same time period. Apparently it was decided that in
neither design the extra steps necessary to incorporate this feature was
necessary. (Ed.)

Page 110. TLDX 40000: I agree that this car does not appear to be
intended for plastic pellet service. The gravity-pneumatic outlets and the
roof trough hatches would not be appropriate. I don't have a better
suggestion as to the intended lading, however. You are also correct that
cars with 125-ton trucks require more air reservoir volume than is provided
by the conventional 6000 cu.in. two compartment reservoir. This car is
light enough to require empty/load equipment, but that does not require
greater reservoir capacity in itself. (Dick Dawson)

TLDX 40000 undoubtadly became DBCX 150--seen at Freeport TX in April
1988 (other DBCX 100's are ex-SAN)--probably still there! (Eric Neubauer)

Page 112. CTTX 477093: There were no low-level 85' flat cars in the
Trailer Train fleet. This is a standard-level F85B car built by Pullman at
Butler in 1961. (Dick Dawson)

Page 118. UP 168043: It can be seen that the car has a sliding main
door and plug auxiliary door, rather than twin sliding doors. (Dick Dawson)

Page 118. UP 490148: Besides the mysterious "red dot" these cars
rated another historical note. This order was the very first from Pullman
with the newly mandated lowered handbrake and lack of roofwalk.
These cars required enormous amounts of wood for interior lining
Each car required: 2,500 board feet for framing and lining ends and sides;
426 square feet for flooring and 1600 square feet for the sub-floor, door
lining and lining in back of side wall fillers. This amount of woodwork
tied up the entire wood shop of Michigan City's plant (or double the normal
cars requirement).
This 500-car order was started on April 4 1966 when the first
stationary center sill was laid down and completed in June. As an
interesting aside not only were canned goods planned for shipping in these
cars but also tin plate, an item not normally thought of as needing
insulated cars. It seems that tin plate can easily be damaged by rust, and
these cars offered a mosture free trip. (Carbuilder. Ed.)

Page 121. TTX auto racks: Does the photo collection, by chance,
include any auto rack cars from this era lettered ETTX? I'm curious about
the "Elevating" racks that these reporting marks originally signified. Carl
Shaver. (No, the collection does not include any cars with racks applied,
with the exception of the several orders that Pullman-Standard built
themselves, all enclosed tri-levels. Drawings of these will be out in
Mainline Modeler some day. Ed.)

Page 123. WP 86074: After seeing all of the 9275-lot cars pictured
throughout the book, it seems that these all had those coupler centering
devices. Actually, a pull downward on the lever from either side would
release the coupler so that it could be slid over the coupling on curves;
apparently the centering device would kick back in when the drawbar
straightened out. I remember seeing them on cars such as this when they
were new, but by the time I was pulling pins regularly (1971) I wasn't
seeing the device at all. I'd have no way of saying how widespread these
devices were (9275 may have been the only PS lot with them, but the other
builders may have had some). (Carl Shaver)

Page 124. CNW 201: The Railroad Passenger Car Annuals I have all show
CNW 201-210 as being built in 1963; 1960 and 1961 yielded coaches 49-150 and
cab cars 151-200. CNW 201-210 are now Metra 7802-7811, and they're still
used on the CNW. (Carl Shaver)

Page 124. CTA 2006: The Carbuilder states, "As a matter of record,
the 90 two-car units form the very first fleet of air conditioned cars ever
built by any U.S. authority type urban rapid transit operation." These cars
were fabricated in Building 100, shown on page 5. Also, the magazine
brought out the fact that this car was not being delivered but in fact
getting ready for movement to Washington D.C. for display at a trade show.
Just how the cars were actually delivered is still a guess. (Ed.)

Page 125. CRT 157: The contract for this set of cars was signed on
July 7, 1966 with delivery scheduled for September 1, 1967, as per the
Carbuilder. (Ed.)

Well, that's it.

Regards,
Jim Kinkaid