Flat car stake pockets, was: 1925 C of G Flat Car Survives


Jim Mischke
 

Pardon me for a basic question.

In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never changed by the prototype roads.

The greater modeling challenge is getting the side sill profile correct. Overall length, heights, and taper. Proportions. With a believeable complement of rivet lines.

This question comes from trying to get a B&O flat car produced by manufacturers, or adapted from an existing product. I have been howled out of the room by modeling peers for even suggesting an otherwise decent model as a potential B&O prototype, only because the number of stake pockets was one off. I am still smarting. Ten or eleven stake pockets? Big fat hairy deal.

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

John

If those are the SAL cars I'm thinking of, they only had 11 stake pockets,
and all of them were rebuilt as pulpwood flats before 1950.

Tim O'Connor



What a find! Look at that--it even has K brakes on it. Wow! I would bet the deck is original too. Seaboard had some very similar cars from TC&I and I'll take a look and see how close they were. SAL's cars were F-4 class.

John


Pieter Roos
 

Hello Jim;

Can't answer for everyone, but for me the number of stake pockets is one of the spotting features of a flat car, like the rib/panel count on a gondola. Also like the ribs on a gondola, the stake pockets often influence the positioning of the lettering, which makes a wrong count really stand out. "Structural" features may not be so important, if they aren't visible. I'm not overly concerned if the number of floor stringers on a house car is wrong, for example.

Pieter Roos
Connecticut

--- In STMFC@..., "jim_mischke" <jmischke@...> wrote:

Pardon me for a basic question.

In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never changed by the prototype roads.

The greater modeling challenge is getting the side sill profile correct. Overall length, heights, and taper. Proportions. With a believeable complement of rivet lines.

This question comes from trying to get a B&O flat car produced by manufacturers, or adapted from an existing product. I have been howled out of the room by modeling peers for even suggesting an otherwise decent model as a potential B&O prototype, only because the number of stake pockets was one off. I am still smarting. Ten or eleven stake pockets? Big fat hairy deal.

John


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 11, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Pieter_Roos wrote:

Hello Jim;

Can't answer for everyone, but for me the number of stake pockets
is one of the spotting features of a flat car, like the rib/panel
count on a gondola. Also like the ribs on a gondola, the stake
pockets often influence the positioning of the lettering, which
makes a wrong count really stand out. "Structural" features may not
be so important, if they aren't visible. I'm not overly concerned
if the number of floor stringers on a house car is wrong, for example.

Pieter Roos
Connecticut

--- In STMFC@..., "jim_mischke" <jmischke@...> wrote:

Pardon me for a basic question.

In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the
number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural
car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never
changed by the prototype roads.

The greater modeling challenge is getting the side sill profile
correct. Overall length, heights, and taper. Proportions. With a
believeable complement of rivet lines.

This question comes from trying to get a B&O flat car produced by
manufacturers, or adapted from an existing product. I have been
howled out of the room by modeling peers for even suggesting an
otherwise decent model as a potential B&O prototype, only because
the number of stake pockets was one off. I am still smarting. Ten
or eleven stake pockets? Big fat hairy deal.
I'm with Pieter on this; it IS a big fat hairy deal. If the number
and/or spacing of stake pockets is wrong, the model just doesn't look
right, regardless of length, height, taper, proportions, etc. And,
as Pieter says, the stake pocket arrangement also critically affects
the placement of lettering.

Richard Hendrickson


Benjamin Hom
 

Jim Mischke wrote:
"In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the
number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural
car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never
changed by the prototype roads."

Pardon me for asking - have YOU ever changed stake pockets on a model?  It's not
as easy as it looks - cleaning up the sides without losing rivet detail is
tough.  The availability of Archer rivets today makes redoing rivet detail much
easier, but it wasn't always this way.


Ben Hom


Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

I have to wonder if it's easier just to make new flatcar sides or side overlays with new detail rather than remove and add stake pockets and rivets.

Steve Lucas.

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

Jim Mischke wrote:
"In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the
number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural
car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never
changed by the prototype roads."

Pardon me for asking - have YOU ever changed stake pockets on a model?  It's not
as easy as it looks - cleaning up the sides without losing rivet detail is
tough.  The availability of Archer rivets today makes redoing rivet detail much
easier, but it wasn't always this way.


Ben Hom


Tim O'Connor
 

Jim

When I mentioned the SAL car and CofG car had 11 and 12 stake pockets
respectively I was thinking of Tichy's model. To change the positions
and/or number of the stake pockets on the Tichy car is not trivial, as
there are pre-formed holes in the car side for the pockets! So in
addition to rivet problems as Ben describes, you have the problem of
how to hide all those holes! I'm sure it can be done, but as someone
said it might be easier to make a whole new side.

Tim O'Connor

Jim Mischke wrote:
"In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the
number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural
car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never
changed by the prototype roads."

Pardon me for asking - have YOU ever changed stake pockets on a model? It's not
as easy as it looks - cleaning up the sides without losing rivet detail is
tough. The availability of Archer rivets today makes redoing rivet detail much
easier, but it wasn't always this way.

Ben Hom


mopacfirst
 

My answer to the below -- no and yes. I have need for, and have built three so far, Mopac homebuilt (DeSoto) 1937 flats that are just a few inches off from the Red Caboose car, but with 13 stake pockets. The model has 12. The first and second from each end are in the correct place, so I drill new holes starting in the center and move outward. One of the new pockets has its right hole where an existing left hole is. I drill out the existing holes and fill with something like .010 rod, which makes them almost disappear. I can carve these while doing minimal damage to the adjacent rivets.

I can and have also made 13-stake 45' flats, also MoPac, by splicing two RC cars. That's somewhat harder to do, to make that joint minimally visible. Helps that the cars are black, and using the Tichy wood-grain technique on the decks helps distract the viewer also.

Ron Merrick

--- In STMFC@..., "Steve Lucas" <stevelucas3@...> wrote:

I have to wonder if it's easier just to make new flatcar sides or side overlays with new detail rather than remove and add stake pockets and rivets.

Steve Lucas.

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

Jim Mischke wrote:
"In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the
number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural
car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never
changed by the prototype roads."

Pardon me for asking - have YOU ever changed stake pockets on a model?  It's not
as easy as it looks - cleaning up the sides without losing rivet detail is
tough.  The availability of Archer rivets today makes redoing rivet detail much
easier, but it wasn't always this way.


Ben Hom


jerryglow2
 

Sounds like you're on the wrong list if you don't give a "big fat hairy" whatever. I think the purpose of this list is pointing out the finer points and modeling accordingly. You can take shortcuts or make compromises and we will not criticize you but don't take us to task for caring.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@..., "jim_mischke" <jmischke@...> wrote:



Pardon me for a basic question.

In modeling, why do we rivet counters care so much about the number of stake pockets on a flat car? They are not a structural car part. Easily changed on models by modelers, although never changed by the prototype roads.

The greater modeling challenge is getting the side sill profile correct. Overall length, heights, and taper. Proportions. With a believeable complement of rivet lines.

This question comes from trying to get a B&O flat car produced by manufacturers, or adapted from an existing product. I have been howled out of the room by modeling peers for even suggesting an otherwise decent model as a potential B&O prototype, only because the number of stake pockets was one off. I am still smarting. Ten or eleven stake pockets? Big fat hairy deal.






--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@> wrote:

John

If those are the SAL cars I'm thinking of, they only had 11 stake pockets,
and all of them were rebuilt as pulpwood flats before 1950.

Tim O'Connor



What a find! Look at that--it even has K brakes on it. Wow! I would bet the deck is original too. Seaboard had some very similar cars from TC&I and I'll take a look and see how close they were. SAL's cars were F-4 class.

John