--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@> wrote:

Paul Catapano asked:
"GENERALLY did railroads assign cars to LCL service semi-permanently?"


Ben Hom answered:
Yes, but the numbers were never as large as the railroad marketing

departments

have led many to believe. Those specially equipped cars with the

fancy paint

were certainly assigned to LCL service, but far greater numbers of

clean general

service boxcars spent part of their time moving LCL.

The B&O for one did not. Their LCL service was the "Time-Saver Service"
and they did have a limited number of box cars painted in the famous
blue with orange comet stenciling with a silver roof. In the late 1950s
the B&O adopted a stenciling on their freight car red box cars
advertising both their "Sentinel Service" and "Time-Saver Service".
(see: http://borhs.org/ModelerMag/index.html). Scroll to the bottom of
the page and download the box stenciling 1920-1960 PDF for examples.

Their box cars suitable for LCL loading or "clean" loads received a
letter "T" inside a circle stenciled to the left of the road number. In
the mid-1960s I recall seeing recently shopped class M-26 box cars,
originally built in the mid to late 1920s, with new paint and stenciling
with a circle T and a "Class A" card from the car inspector. Only box
cars with a circle T were suitable for Time-Saver Service no matter what
logo was stenciled on the car.

Regards,

Bob Witt

I would add that there were far more B&O boxcars fit for LCL service (circle T stencil) than were actually engaged in LCL transportation.

Tim O'Connor wrote:

I'm sure that's true in the 1950's, but I remember the Gilbert/
Nelson discovery years ago that in the 1930's and before, somewhere
close to 50% of all box car loads were LCL. (Which explains the
massive size of LCL buildings/facilities in major cities.)

And of course the improvements in motor trucks and highways
were rapidly cutting into that LCL traffic all during the 1920s, so
those massive buildings were obsolescent already by 1930.

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

The railroads were still battling for LCL traffic in the 1950's. The Burlington & the Santa Fe built new freight stations in the Chicago area in the 1950's. The railroads were big into advertising their LCL services. I consider the late 40's early 1950's as the golden age of LCL traffic.
Randy

Randy

Golden Age in what sense? In terms of volume, 1950 was a fraction of what
it had been in the 1920's. By 1960, most railroads essentially gave up the
business to trucks and freight forwarders.

On the other hand, the decline in "carloadings" in the eastern US was led
by the loss of LCL traffic. If you exclude LCL (or never depended too much
on it in the first place, like the N&W or C&O) then things weren't so bad

Tim

The railroads were still battling for LCL traffic in the 1950's. The Burlington & the Santa Fe built new freight stations in the Chicago area in the 1950's. The railroads were big into advertising their LCL services. I consider the late 40's early 1950's as the golden age of LCL traffic.
Randy

The railroads were still battling for LCL traffic in the 1950's.
The Burlington & the Santa Fe built new freight stations in the
Chicago area in the 1950's. The railroads were big into advertising
their LCL services. I consider the late 40's early 1950's as the
golden age of LCL traffic.

"Battling" doesn't mean there was much of it, only that it was
worth fighting for. Certainly in the Far West the LCL volume was tiny
by the 1950s, compared to the 1920s. "Golden Age?" You sure have a
different definition than what I'm used to.

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