Topics

What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?


gary laakso
 

Here is the caboose:

 

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Emil-Albrecht-Photos/1948-May-Montpelier/i-F2Lvh62/A 

 

What class of boxcar was it converted from?

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Brock


Aley, Jeff A
 

According to Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78:

“During May through September 1947, 40 cars (UP 05700-05739) were converted from 175000-series steel underframe automobile cars, including the addition of side windows, end doors, and end platforms.  These automobile cars were originally built in November 1913 to January 1914.”

 

According to Appendix D in Union Pacific Freight Cars: 1936-51 by Terry Metcalfe p216, 175000-175399 were class A-40-1.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 2:53 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

Here is the caboose:

 

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Emil-Albrecht-Photos/1948-May-Montpelier/i-F2Lvh62/A 

 

What class of boxcar was it converted from?

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Brock


gary laakso
 

Thanks, Jeff!  It does seem odd that in 1947, UP elected not to place an order to buy new cabooses. 

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Brock

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 10:23 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

According to Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78:

“During May through September 1947, 40 cars (UP 05700-05739) were converted from 175000-series steel underframe automobile cars, including the addition of side windows, end doors, and end platforms.  These automobile cars were originally built in November 1913 to January 1914.”

 

According to Appendix D in Union Pacific Freight Cars: 1936-51 by Terry Metcalfe p216, 175000-175399 were class A-40-1.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 2:53 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

Here is the caboose:

 

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Emil-Albrecht-Photos/1948-May-Montpelier/i-F2Lvh62/A 

 

What class of boxcar was it converted from?

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Brock


Bruce Smith
 

I find it interesting that the windows interrupt the Warren truss members... Aren't those supposed to be part of the weight carrying structure of the car?  I guess conductors didn't weigh as much as freight ;)


I also note two common additions to single sheathed cars, the metal straps between the truss members and the reinforcing pieces over the bottom ends of the truss members.


Regards

Bruce Smith

Auburn, AL


From: STMFC@... on behalf of 'Aley, Jeff A' Jeff.A.Aley@... [STMFC]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 9:22 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?
 


According to Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78:

“During May through September 1947, 40 cars (UP 05700-05739) were converted from 175000-series steel underframe automobile cars, including the addition of side windows, end doors, and end platforms.  These automobile cars were originally built in November 1913 to January 1914.”

 

According to Appendix D in Union Pacific Freight Cars: 1936-51 by Terry Metcalfe p216, 175000-175399 were class A-40-1.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

 

Here is the caboose:

 

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Emil-Albrecht-Photos/1948-May-Montpelier/i-F2Lvh62/A 

 

What class of boxcar was it converted from?

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Broc


Tony Thompson
 

      Even though these were converted in 1947, some modelers continue to call them "war emergency" cabooses.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history






Tony Thompson
 

       A detail to note on these cars: the end porches are added onto the original car body. The net result is how most cabooses were built -- the end sill is under the end door, not out at the end of the platform.

Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history






Greg Martin
 

Bruce,
 
You are right and one thing to consider is the amount of weight the car will handle now and in the future.
 
Also the shear on the web passing through the window frame would be structurally fine if all the components are well secured, think of a staircase going through a set of floor joist.
 
What is of interest is the damage to the top of the collision post on the left side.
 
I wonder how long they lasted before going into MW services? Beautiful example of a rebuild.
 
 
Greg Martin
 
Eventually all things merge into one and a river runs through it.
Norman Maclean
 

In a message dated 4/23/2017 8:06:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, STMFC@... writes:

I find it interesting that the windows interrupt the Warren truss members... Aren't those supposed to be part of the weight carrying structure of the car?  I guess conductors didn't weigh as much as freight ;)


I also note two common additions to single sheathed cars, the metal straps between the truss members and the reinforcing pieces over the bottom ends of the truss members.


Regards

Bruce Smith

Auburn, AL


Charles Morrill
 

It is hard to tell for sure, but the window appears to be brought away from the side enough that the truss member is continuous behind the windows.  This is certainly a more elaborate boxcar rebuild than the SP versions of boxcar cabooses.
 
Charlie
 

From: 'Bruce F. Smith' smithbf@... [STMFC]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 10:06 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?
 


I find it interesting that the windows interrupt the Warren truss members... Aren't those supposed to be part of the weight carrying structure of the car?  I guess conductors didn't weigh as much as freight ;)

 

I also note two common additions to single sheathed cars, the metal straps between the truss members and the reinforcing pieces over the bottom ends of the truss members.

 

Regards

Bruce Smith

Auburn, AL


From: STMFC@... on behalf of 'Aley, Jeff A' Jeff.A.Aley@... [STMFC]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 9:22 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?
 


According to Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78:

“During May through September 1947, 40 cars (UP 05700-05739) were converted from 175000-series steel underframe automobile cars, including the addition of side windows, end doors, and end platforms.  These automobile cars were originally built in November 1913 to January 1914.”

 

According to Appendix D in Union Pacific Freight Cars: 1936-51 by Terry Metcalfe p216, 175000-175399 were class A-40-1.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

 

Here is the caboose:

 

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Emil-Albrecht-Photos/1948-May-Montpelier/i-F2Lvh62/A 

 

What class of boxcar was it converted from?

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Broc


Bruce Smith
 

​Charlie,


 I don't think so... the front of the window frame is flush with the truss members and there is no sign of the truss running through behind the window... not to mention that the glass would be right where the truss would be.


Regards

Bruce Smith

Auburn, AL


From: STMFC@... on behalf of 'Charles Morrill' badlands@... [STMFC]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 10:43 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?
 


It is hard to tell for sure, but the window appears to be brought away from the side enough that the truss member is continuous behind the windows.  This is certainly a more elaborate boxcar rebuild than the SP versions of boxcar cabooses.
 
Charlie

 


Greg Martin
 

Charlie,

 
I have to politely disagree. Look at the depth of the shadows of the window frame and the frame work that surround the windows to the truss webs, they are the same. The windows are not applied beyond the trusses.
 
Greg
 
Eventually all things merge into one and a river runs through it.
Norman Maclean
 
In a message dated 4/23/2017 8:43:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, STMFC@... writes:
It is hard to tell for sure, but the window appears to be brought away from the side enough that the truss member is continuous behind the windows.  This is certainly a more elaborate boxcar rebuild than the SP versions of boxcar cabooses.
 
Charlie


Tony Thompson
 

I wrote:

 

       A detail to note on these cars: the end porches are added onto the original car body. The net result is how most cabooses were built -- the end sill is under the end door, not out at the end of the platform.


     More careful examination of the original A-40-1 car body makes me reverse the above judgement. The end porches are cut into the original car body, and the end sill is indeed at the end of the car.


Tony Thompson             Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705         www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history






Jack Mullen
 

Tony,
I respectfully disagree. Note that the bolsters are only a couple feet inboard from the ends of the carbody, and the outer wheels are under the platform. I think the side sills have been cut away to create stepwells.

Jack Mullen


mikefrommontanan
 

Sun Apr 23, 2017 8:27 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Tony Thompson" sigpress

A detail to note on these cars: the end porches are added onto the original car body. The net result is how most cabooses were built -- the end sill is under the end door, not out at the end of the platform.

    
I would beg to differ on this point.  The roof would have to have been entirely rebuilt to "tack" the platforms on the end.  If you look at the upper corner end of the roof, you can still see the tabs for the ladder/lateral roofwalk. 

In addition the fact that the Carmer cut levers survived the rebuild would be another indicator that the original end sill is at the end of the platform--versus the end of the carbody.

Michael Seitz
Missoula MT

Virus-free. www.avast.com



Jim Betz
 

Tony,

Good catch - although in the pictures I've just checked
it looks like there might have been a sort of "double end
sill" ... there is a lighter structure but definitely
something I'd call a "sill" at the end of the platform.
And the frame under them seems to extend, without a break
from end to end. And those sills under the end of the
cabin don't seem to go all the way across and appear to be
supporting the steps as much as anything else.

Perhaps this created a sort of "crumple zone" in the
event of a rear end collision?
- Jim B.

4e. Re: What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?
Posted by: "Tony Thompson"tony@signaturepress.com sigpress
Date: Sun Apr 23, 2017 8:27 am ((PDT))

A detail to note on these cars: the end porches are added onto the original car body. The net result is how most cabooses were built -- the end sill is under the end door, not out at the end of the platform.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; e-mail,tony@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Aley, Jeff A
 

Greg,

 

                You asked, “I wonder how long they lasted before going into MW services? Beautiful example of a rebuild.”

 

                The caboose in question was built as a temporary caboose: “In 1947 and 1951-52, traffic levels again reached high levels, and Union Pacific again found that it didn’t have sufficient cabooses for road service.” 

“With the arrival of 100 new CA-5 steel cabooses in 1952, this … group of 71 temporary cabooses was re-assigned to maintenance-of-way service as Boarding-Bunk cars.”

-Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78.

 

Regards,

-Jeff

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 8:42 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

Bruce,

 

You are right and one thing to consider is the amount of weight the car will handle now and in the future.

 

Also the shear on the web passing through the window frame would be structurally fine if all the components are well secured, think of a staircase going through a set of floor joist.

 

What is of interest is the damage to the top of the collision post on the left side.

 

I wonder how long they lasted before going into MW services? Beautiful example of a rebuild.

 

 

Greg Martin

 

Eventually all things merge into one and a river runs through it.
Norman Maclean

 


Aley, Jeff A
 

They couldn’t get new cabooses fast enough.

 

-Jeff

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 8:03 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

Thanks, Jeff!  It does seem odd that in 1947, UP elected not to place an order to buy new cabooses. 

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Brock

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 10:23 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: RE: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

According to Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78:

“During May through September 1947, 40 cars (UP 05700-05739) were converted from 175000-series steel underframe automobile cars, including the addition of side windows, end doors, and end platforms.  These automobile cars were originally built in November 1913 to January 1914.”

 

According to Appendix D in Union Pacific Freight Cars: 1936-51 by Terry Metcalfe p216, 175000-175399 were class A-40-1.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 2:53 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

Here is the caboose:

 

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Emil-Albrecht-Photos/1948-May-Montpelier/i-F2Lvh62/A 

 

What class of boxcar was it converted from?

 

Gary Laakso

south of Mike Brock


Jack Mullen
 

My previous post inadvertently became a bit confusing. Due to internet time warp, it appeared after Tony's reconsidered post, so perhaps appearing that I disagreed with that.. To be clear, I concur with the later post, that the end platforms are cut into the original carbody, not tacked on.  BTW is "porch" an SP term?

Jack Mullen


Jack Mullen
 

It's not uncommon for boxcars that are converted to cabooses or MOW camp cars to have some of the side truss members removed or severed to accommodate windows. The new use doesn't require anything near the original load capacity, indeed it's much like an empty boxcar. But notice also that the severed ends of the diagonals terminate at new horizontal structural members: a Z above the window, and an angle below the window sill. These are connected to the posts on either side of the window, and this revised framing restores some of the lost shear strength. 

I kinda figured that the reason for this conversion was that with the beginning of pool cabooses, the large auto car body was needed to provide room for the pool table. < grinning and ducking>

Jack Mullen


Greg Martin
 

Thanks Jeff,
 
Kind of a shame that they were relegated to work service so quickly.
 
I wonder if anyone has taken the time to really focus on a good kitbash or scratch-bash of it? I don't think a scratch-bash would be that hard.
 
Greg
 
Eventually all things merge into one and a river runs through it.
Norman Maclean
 

In a message dated 4/23/2017 12:57:17 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, STMFC@... writes:

Greg,

                You asked, “I wonder how long they lasted before going into MW services? Beautiful example of a rebuild.”

                The caboose in question was built as a temporary caboose: “In 1947 and 1951-52, traffic levels again reached high levels, and Union Pacific again found that it didn't have sufficient cabooses for road service.” 

“With the arrival of 100 new CA-5 steel cabooses in 1952, this … group of 71 temporary cabooses was re-assigned to maintenance-of-way service as Boarding-Bunk cars.”

-Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad by Don Strack and James L. Ehrenberger p78.

Regards,

-Jeff


Aley, Jeff A
 

Jack,

 

                You wrote, “I kinda figured that the reason for this conversion was that with the beginning of pool cabooses, the large auto car body was needed to provide room for the pool table. < grinning and ducking>”

 

Actually                , that’s the wrong kind of “pool”.  UP did experiment with Pool cabooses converted from tank cars.  They scrapped the cars after several injuries caused by crews fitting unauthorized diving boards.

 

Regards,

 

-Jeff

 

(Only 23 days too late for April Fool’s Day).

 

 

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 2:53 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: What Class Boxcar Was This UP Caboose Converted From?

 

 

It's not uncommon for boxcars that are converted to cabooses or MOW camp cars to have some of the side truss members removed or severed to accommodate windows. The new use doesn't require anything near the original load capacity, indeed it's much like an empty boxcar. But notice also that the severed ends of the diagonals terminate at new horizontal structural members: a Z above the window, and an angle below the window sill. These are connected to the posts on either side of the window, and this revised framing restores some of the lost shear strength. 

 

I kinda figured that the reason for this conversion was that with the beginning of pool cabooses, the large auto car body was needed to provide room for the pool table. < grinning and ducking>

 

Jack Mullen