Dry Flow Tank Cars ?
|
np328
Sorry if this has been discussed here prior. I could not find anything in posts. While researching, this came up..from page 605 of a 1932 Railway Age is an article on General American Dry-Flo tank cars. Wondering if anyone has a sense of how many of these cars were built. Covered hoppers are still in the future a bit. In the 50s, were these still running? Has anyone ever produced a model (HO) of these? Here is the link: https://books.google.com/books?id=vp8lAAAAMAAJ&dq=railway%20Age%201928&pg=PA605#v=onepage&q&f=false Thank you in advance. Jim Dick - St. Paul |
|
|
|
Jim the M&StL leased two, but only one was actually placed in service, on 11-1-1936. Numbered 70001. I have a copy of the contract between GATC and M&StL. The contract was for 10 months. I don’t know if it was renewed. I do know Gene Green spent many years attempting to learn about this car. He never found a photo. A diagram of the inner workings of the car was published in the 1937 Car Builder’s Cyclopedia. I will send you a copy off list.
Doug Harding www.iowacentralrr.org
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2018 10:29 PM To: STMFC@... Subject: [STMFC] Dry Flow Tank Cars ?
Sorry if this has been discussed here prior. I could not find anything in posts. While researching, this came up..from page 605 of a 1932 Railway Age is an article on General American Dry-Flo tank cars. Wondering if anyone has a sense of how many of these cars were built. Covered hoppers are still in the future a bit. In the 50s, were these still running?
Has anyone ever produced a model (HO) of these? Here is the link: https://books.google.com/books?id=vp8lAAAAMAAJ&dq=railway%20Age%201928&pg=PA605#v=onepage&q&f=false
Thank you in advance. Jim Dick - St. Paul
|
|
|
|
Garth Groff or Sally Sanford <sarahsan@...>
Jim and Friends,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
This type of car was classed as "LT" or "LTA". LT is defined in my 1958 ORER as "A permanently enclosed car having a cylindrical body for handling certain dry powdered or granular commodities . . . . Inside of body provided with mechanical means to expedite unloading. LTA uses the same definition, but lacks the unloading mechanism. GATX (LT) 33000-33053 are listed in my ORER, but the "number of cars" column is empty, suggesting these had recently been retired or altered to some other classification. In addition, GATX (LTA) series 34000-34099 is also empty. One other GATX LTA series with mixed numbers in the 31XXX and 32XXX ranges shows eight cars in service. GATX series 33000 is listed with outside length of 40'. GATX 34000 had an outside length of 31' 10". The mixed series had a length of 38' 2". No other dimensions are listed. From the photo of 33000, it appears that an Athearn 40' single-dome tank car might make a good start for a kitbash. I also found Barret Division of Allied Chemical with 96 LTA cars listed as BMX 800-899 with an outside length of 36'; and four BMX 827, 838, 845 and 896 listed as exceptions with a different capacity. Chicago Freight Car & Parts Company operated four LT cars under the CFRX reporting marks. United States Railway Equipment Co. operated two LT cars as USEX 101-102. A builder's photo of American Cyanamid Co.s CYX 102 is found in Gregg's TRAIN SHED CYCLOPEDIA No. 38. No cars of this type are among the CYX listings in 1958. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/28/18 11:29 PM,
jcdworkingonthenp@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
Thanks to Garth, I have the proper ARA designations, so I check my Jan 1941 ORER. No listing for the MSTL car, as I suspected. I doubt the contract was renewed after the original 10 month commitment. Among the information I received from Gene Green about the MSTL car, was a mechanical record for GATX 34000, dated 1-27-37. So this may have been the actual car leased to the MSTL. It indicates the car was built 2-17 by Warren, classed as LO and had a capacity of 10140 gallons. And was weighed on 10-36 at 46800.
In the 1941 ORER I found the following listed for General American in the tank car section, not under covered hoppers, with no indication of how many cars in each class. LT 33000-33019 LT 33020 LT 33021-33030 LO 33031-33049 ARA EXP 33050 LO 33051-33054 LO 34000-34499
In the NMRA issued 1943 ORER was the number of cars in each class. LT 33000-33019, six cars listed LT 33020, one car LT 33021-33030, six cars LO 33031-33049, eighteen cars ARA EXP 33050 reclassed as TL, one car LO 33051-33053, three cars LO 33054 reclassed as TM, one car LO 34000-34099, two cars (note number series changed)
From the number series it would appear that General American anticipated building more cars than they actually did.
Doug Harding www.iowacentralrr.org
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 5:25 AM To: STMFC@... Subject: Re: [STMFC] Dry Flow Tank Cars ?
Jim and Friends, On 1/28/18 11:29 PM, jcdworkingonthenp@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
Richard Townsend
There was an article in the September 2013 RMC by Mike Evans about kitbashing the Barrett LTA cars from a Tichy tank car. The result was outstanding.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR
-----Original Message----- From: Garth Groff or Sally Sanford sarahsan@... [STMFC] To: STMFC Sent: Mon, Jan 29, 2018 3:24 am Subject: Re: [STMFC] Dry Flow Tank Cars ?
Jim and Friends,
This type of car was classed as "LT" or "LTA". LT is defined in my 1958 ORER as "A permanently enclosed car having a cylindrical body for handling certain dry powdered or granular commodities . . . . Inside of body provided with mechanical means to expedite unloading. LTA uses the same definition, but lacks the unloading mechanism. GATX (LT) 33000-33053 are listed in my ORER, but the "number of cars" column is empty, suggesting these had recently been retired or altered to some other classification. In addition, GATX (LTA) series 34000-34099 is also empty. One other GATX LTA series with mixed numbers in the 31XXX and 32XXX ranges shows eight cars in service. GATX series 33000 is listed with outside length of 40'. GATX 34000 had an outside length of 31' 10". The mixed series had a length of 38' 2". No other dimensions are listed. From the photo of 33000, it appears that an Athearn 40' single-dome tank car might make a good start for a kitbash. I also found Barret Division of Allied Chemical with 96 LTA cars listed as BMX 800-899 with an outside length of 36'; and four BMX 827, 838, 845 and 896 listed as exceptions with a different capacity. Chicago Freight Car & Parts Company operated four LT cars under the CFRX reporting marks. United States Railway Equipment Co. operated two LT cars as USEX 101-102. A builder's photo of American Cyanamid Co.s CYX 102 is found in Gregg's TRAIN SHED CYCLOPEDIA No. 38. No cars of this type are among the CYX listings in 1958. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/28/18 11:29 PM,
jcdworkingonthenp@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
Dave Parker
Because these were classified as tank cars (or so it seems), more detailed information may be found in the tariff books that Ian Cranstone has reproduced and published. These provide a car-by-car listing, along with tank and dome volumes and (sometimes) other interesting information. I see a subset of these cars in my 1936 edition. For some, but not all, the tank volume is given in cubic feet rather than gallons. GATX 31096-31099 have a footnote indicating they were for use with "Dry Arsenic" (I have no idea as to what chemical form). Cars 33021-33026 were apparently general use; the footnote indicates "Dry Flow Automatic". Car 33049 (1680 cu ft) was designated as a "Wet-Flo tank", which I would guess means it carried some kind of slurry. I don't have the 1955 tariff, but several folks on this list do. They should be able to look up the comparable information for that time-frame, which coincides with Jim's original query. Dave Parker Riverside, CA On Monday, January 29, 2018 7:34 AM, "Richard Townsend richtownsend@... [STMFC]" <STMFC@...> wrote: There was an article in the September 2013 RMC by Mike Evans about kitbashing the Barrett LTA cars from a Tichy tank car. The result was outstanding. Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR
-----Original Message----- From: Garth Groff or Sally Sanford sarahsan@... [STMFC] To: STMFC Sent: Mon, Jan 29, 2018 3:24 am Subject: Re: [STMFC] Dry Flow Tank Cars ?
Jim and Friends,
This type of car was classed as "LT" or "LTA". LT is defined in my 1958 ORER as "A permanently enclosed car having a cylindrical body for handling certain dry powdered or granular commodities . . . . Inside of body provided with mechanical means to expedite unloading. LTA uses the same definition, but lacks the unloading mechanism. GATX (LT) 33000-33053 are listed in my ORER, but the "number of cars" column is empty, suggesting these had recently been retired or altered to some other classification. In addition, GATX (LTA) series 34000-34099 is also empty. One other GATX LTA series with mixed numbers in the 31XXX and 32XXX ranges shows eight cars in service. GATX series 33000 is listed with outside length of 40'. GATX 34000 had an outside length of 31' 10". The mixed series had a length of 38' 2". No other dimensions are listed. From the photo of 33000, it appears that an Athearn 40' single-dome tank car might make a good start for a kitbash. I also found Barret Division of Allied Chemical with 96 LTA cars listed as BMX 800-899 with an outside length of 36'; and four BMX 827, 838, 845 and 896 listed as exceptions with a different capacity. Chicago Freight Car & Parts Company operated four LT cars under the CFRX reporting marks. United States Railway Equipment Co. operated two LT cars as USEX 101-102. A builder's photo of American Cyanamid Co.s CYX 102 is found in Gregg's TRAIN SHED CYCLOPEDIA No. 38. No cars of this type are among the CYX listings in 1958. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/28/18 11:29 PM,
jcdworkingonthenp@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
Garth Groff or Sally Sanford <sarahsan@...>
Dave,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I have no information on how these cars were classified in the early days, but LT and LTA are in my 1958 ORER as 'Class "L", Special Car Type'. Interestingly, this section includes "LO", covered hoppers, which were hardly special by 1958. Or do you mean for billing purposes they were treated as tank cars, and we're comparing apples to oranges here? I'm curious to know how many of these cars existed in earlier days. Clearly by the late 1950s there were just a handful, and the case of the empty numbers of the GATX cars, and the missing American Cyanamid cars, shows that some had already disappeared. I suspect that by the end of our period, LT and LTA cars were wearing out or becoming obsolete, and were replaced by LO covered hoppers. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/29/18 1:46 PM, Dave Parker
spottab@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
Dave Parker
Garth: I probably should not have used the word "classified". I only meant to point out some of the cars under discussion appear in my 1936 tariff book, along with more conventional tank cars. It could well be a billing thing; after all, tank-car rates were based on volume, not weight, and perhaps that was the case with these dry-flow cars. In my 1935 ORER, I do see some of these classified as LT, but not any as LO. But only the latter shows up in my 1931 Cyc, illustrating why I get frustrated trying to sort out the ARA/AAR car classifications. Too much of a moving target, especially in the good old days. What I was really suggesting is that somebody take a peek at the 1955 tariff to see if these cars are still listed there. If so, then some better clarity may be obtained than that offered by the ORERs, especially with regard to numbers in service. If not, well, it was worth a look. Best, Dave Parker On Monday, January 29, 2018 12:37 PM, "Garth Groff or Sally Sanford sarahsan@... [STMFC]" wrote:
Dave,
I have no information on how these cars were classified in the early days, but LT and LTA are in my 1958 ORER as 'Class "L", Special Car Type'. Interestingly, this section includes "LO", covered hoppers, which were hardly special by 1958. Or do you mean for billing purposes they were treated as tank cars, and we're comparing apples to oranges here? I'm curious to know how many of these cars existed in earlier days. Clearly by the late 1950s there were just a handful, and the case of the empty numbers of the GATX cars, and the missing American Cyanamid cars, shows that some had already disappeared. I suspect that by the end of our period, LT and LTA cars were wearing out or becoming obsolete, and were replaced by LO covered hoppers. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/29/18 1:46 PM, Dave Parker
spottab@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
For what it could be worth, UTLX had some similar cars that
they rebuilt from Class V (Van Dyke, frameless) tank cars in the 1930's.
They are listed in the UTLX 1952 roster document, but do not show up in the 1955
tariff. They also weren't listed in the 1936 tariff. Only 1 LT
car in the number range exists in a 1954 ORER.
Steve Hile From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 3:18 PM To: STMFC@... Subject: Re: [STMFC] Dry Flow Tank Cars ?
Garth:
I probably should not have
used the word "classified". I only meant to point out some of the cars
under discussion appear in my 1936 tariff book, along with more conventional
tank cars. It could well be a billing thing; after all, tank-car rates
were based on volume, not weight, and perhaps that was the case with these
dry-flow cars.
In my 1935 ORER, I do see
some of these classified as LT, but not any as LO. But only the latter
shows up in my 1931 Cyc, illustrating why I get frustrated trying to sort out
the ARA/AAR car classifications. Too much of a moving target, especially
in the good old days.
What I was really
suggesting is that somebody take a peek at the 1955 tariff to see if these cars
are still listed there. If so, then some better clarity may be obtained
than that offered by the ORERs, especially with regard to numbers in
service. If not, well, it was worth a look.
Best,
Dave Parker
On Monday, January 29, 2018 12:37 PM,
"Garth Groff or Sally Sanford sarahsan@... [STMFC]"
wrote: Dave,
I have no information on how these cars were classified in the early days, but LT and LTA are in my 1958 ORER as 'Class "L", Special Car Type'. Interestingly, this section includes "LO", covered hoppers, which were hardly special by 1958. Or do you mean for billing purposes they were treated as tank cars, and we're comparing apples to oranges here? I'm curious to know how many of these cars existed in earlier days. Clearly by the late 1950s there were just a handful, and the case of the empty numbers of the GATX cars, and the missing American Cyanamid cars, shows that some had already disappeared. I suspect that by the end of our period, LT and LTA cars were wearing out or becoming obsolete, and were replaced by LO covered hoppers. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/29/18 1:46 PM, Dave Parker spottab@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
Schleigh Mike
Hello Group! Dave Parker recently posted a note in part reading----- ".........
On Monday, January 29, 2018, 4:21:44 PM EST, Dave Parker spottab@... [STMFC] wrote:
Garth: I probably should not have used the word "classified". I only meant to point out some of the cars under discussion appear in my 1936 tariff book, along with more conventional tank cars. It could well be a billing thing; after all, tank-car rates were based on volume, not weight, and perhaps that was the case with these dry-flow cars. In my 1935 ORER, I do see some of these classified as LT, but not any as LO. But only the latter shows up in my 1931 Cyc, illustrating why I get frustrated trying to sort out the ARA/AAR car classifications. Too much of a moving target, especially in the good old days. What I was really suggesting is that somebody take a peek at the 1955 tariff to see if these cars are still listed there. If so, then some better clarity may be obtained than that offered by the ORERs, especially with regard to numbers in service. If not, well, it was worth a look. Best, Dave Parker On Monday, January 29, 2018 12:37 PM, "Garth Groff or Sally Sanford sarahsan@... [STMFC]" wrote:
Dave,
I have no information on how these cars were classified in the early days, but LT and LTA are in my 1958 ORER as 'Class "L", Special Car Type'. Interestingly, this section includes "LO", covered hoppers, which were hardly special by 1958. Or do you mean for billing purposes they were treated as tank cars, and we're comparing apples to oranges here? I'm curious to know how many of these cars existed in earlier days. Clearly by the late 1950s there were just a handful, and the case of the empty numbers of the GATX cars, and the missing American Cyanamid cars, shows that some had already disappeared. I suspect that by the end of our period, LT and LTA cars were wearing out or becoming obsolete, and were replaced by LO covered hoppers. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 1/29/18 1:46 PM, Dave Parker
spottab@... [STMFC] wrote:
|
|
|
|
np328
Thank you, to all that replied to my question on these cars. Doug, thanks, Richard, thank you for the lead on the RMC article. I am looking that over and pondering. These were certainly not common cars, though interesting to look at. Jim Dick - St. Paul, MN |
|
|
|
Richard Townsend
I went back and looked at the article, and a significant part of the kitbash was turning the Tichy USRA-design car into a General American 5-radial-course tank car. With Tangent's new 10K General American 5-radial-course tank car, that part is done for you. So today I would start with the Tangent kit. The kitbash is quite elegant regardless of where you start.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, OR
-----Original Message----- From: jcdworkingonthenp@... [STMFC] To: STMFC Sent: Thu, Feb 1, 2018 11:34 am Subject: RE: [STMFC] Dry Flow Tank Cars ? Thank you,
to all that replied to my question on these cars.
Doug, thanks,
Richard, thank you for the lead on the RMC article. I am looking that over and pondering. These were certainly not common cars, though interesting to look at.
Jim Dick - St. Paul, MN
&nbs
p;
|
|
|