Gulf tank cars


brianleppert@att.net
 

Clark Propst recently started a thread called "Oil companies for IM 8k tank".  Near the end some comments were made about Gulf tank cars.  I would like to add some more.

Attached is image of a Gulf 8k capacity tank car, GRCX 3200.  This car has a tank similar to InterMountain's sitting on a USRA-designed underframe as produced by Gould/Tichy and sitting on USRA-designed arch bar trucks.  Two more photos of the exact same car are in Ted Culotta's spiral bound Steam Era Freight Car Reference Volume Two: Tank Cars, page 98.  Right under these is a photo of GRCX 3293 showing a similar car in 1959.

Dave Parker mentioned there were 400 of these tank cars, built 1920-1923 by Standard Steel Car Company.  That would put them in the 2900-3299 number series.

InterMountain's 8000 gallon tank could be used with some modifications.  The Gould/Tichy underframe is not too short for the IM tank, as mentioned by Dave Parker.  It's right on but the molded-on tank bands on the tank need to be removed and new ones repositioned.  The IM 8k tank measures only a scale 5/8" shorter than the Gould Co. molded tank.  David Thompson measured a 4-6" difference.  Has Tichy retooled the tank?

The Gould/Tichy underframe is set up for a 10k tank, so the saddles will need to be modified for the smaller diameter 8k tank.

Standard Steel Car Co. also built 10,000 gallon capacity tank cars for Gulf.  GRCX 5188 appears in The Post War Freight Car Fleet by Kline and Culotta, page 217 and GRCX 5010's photo is in the soft cover Classic Freight Cars The Series Vol. 2 by Henderson, page 60.  Again, a USRA-designed tank underframe is used, although this time the tank saddles look like Union Tank Line's X-3 design (SSC also built X-3 tank cars for UTL).

IM's 10k tank, with modifications, is a good match.

The image attached is a scan made by Ted Culotta when he put the photo up on E-bay.  It came from D.K. Retterer, neg. #823 and Mr. Retterer may still sell prints.  The print is better than the scan.  I was the winning bidder, and as I recall the only bidder.

For full disclosure, I worked for Bill Gould back when we did the tooling for the USRA tank car kit.  The underframe was mostly my work.  That was 35 years ago.

Brian Leppert
Tahoe Model Works
Carson City, NV

please visit   www.resincarworks.com/tahoe.htm


Dave Parker
 

Brian:

Please allow me to clarify:

When I said the Tichy frame was too short for the IM 8 kgal tank, what I should have  said is there is a mismatch between between the spacing between the tank saddles on the frame than tank-bands on the body.  As you correctly point out, the cast-on tanks bands would need to be ground off and redone in order to use the frame and the tank as is.  When I look at the broadside view of 3293, the overall length of the two components appears to match.  That said, it seems like maybe we are doing some guessing here.  Are there any actual schematics of the Standard Steel cars, or should we assume they followed the USRA plans exactly for the UF?

That still leaves the issues of dome size, valve spacing, how to handle the tie-downs (which changed over time), etc. but, yes, it seems the IM tank and the Tichy frame could be married if one wanted to undertake such a kitbash.

I am glad that you posted the builder's photo of car 3200 because it allows me to insert a comment that these cars were delivered with KD brakes rather than KC.  Contemporaneous ACF-built cars also had KDs, at least through ~1922, but it is not something I have otherwise seen much on 1920s tank cars.

Dave Parker
Riverside, CA


Andy Carlson
 

Great info from Brian Leppert!

The size of the IMRC 8K gallon tank for this Gulf project is cool. I remember years ago I went through several Car Builders Encyclopedias where I discovered that the type 27 ASF tanks were near perfect matches for the GATC designs. I was lobbying Intermountain Railway Co to make GA tank cars, and I told Frank that they already had the tanks, they just needed a new frame. I had to recontact Frank later to inform him that I forgot about that the molded on tank bands, which because they reflected the wheelbase of the frames, that meant that IMRC did not have the GA tank body as the two designs had different wheelbases.

More years before that I built my first kit which blow me away, a Gould USRA tank car. I never before had a kit assemble so well, so much that it was a pleasure to build. For years these tanks were my favorite freight cars in all of HO, even after the comments from Richard Hendrickson informed me of these model's prototype errors. My favorite part of the build were the frames, and Brian, cudos to you for contributing to that great moment in time.
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

On Sunday, November 18, 2018, 3:54:43 PM PST, brianleppert@... <brianleppert@...> wrote:


Clark Propst recently started a thread called "Oil companies for IM 8k tank".  Near the end some comments were made about Gulf tank cars.  I would like to add some more.

Attached is image of a Gulf 8k capacity tank car, GRCX 3200.  This car has a tank similar to InterMountain's sitting on a USRA-designed underframe as produced by Gould/Tichy and sitting on USRA-designed arch bar trucks.  Two more photos of the exact same car are in Ted Culotta's spiral bound Steam Era Freight Car Reference Volume Two: Tank Cars, page 98.  Right under these is a photo of GRCX 3293 showing a similar car in 1959.

Dave Parker mentioned there were 400 of these tank cars, built 1920-1923 by Standard Steel Car Company.  That would put them in the 2900-3299 number series.

InterMountain's 8000 gallon tank could be used with some modifications.  The Gould/Tichy underframe is not too short for the IM tank, as mentioned by Dave Parker.  It's right on but the molded-on tank bands on the tank need to be removed and new ones repositioned.  The IM 8k tank measures only a scale 5/8" shorter than the Gould Co. molded tank.  David Thompson measured a 4-6" difference.  Has Tichy retooled the tank?

The Gould/Tichy underframe is set up for a 10k tank, so the saddles will need to be modified for the smaller diameter 8k tank.

Standard Steel Car Co. also built 10,000 gallon capacity tank cars for Gulf.  GRCX 5188 appears in The Post War Freight Car Fleet by Kline and Culotta, page 217 and GRCX 5010's photo is in the soft cover Classic Freight Cars The Series Vol. 2 by Henderson, page 60.  Again, a USRA-designed tank underframe is used, although this time the tank saddles look like Union Tank Line's X-3 design (SSC also built X-3 tank cars for UTL).

IM's 10k tank, with modifications, is a good match.

The image attached is a scan made by Ted Culotta when he put the photo up on E-bay.  It came from D.K. Retterer, neg. #823 and Mr. Retterer may still sell prints.  The print is better than the scan.  I was the winning bidder, and as I recall the only bidder.

For full disclosure, I worked for Bill Gould back when we did the tooling for the USRA tank car kit.  The underframe was mostly my work.  That was 35 years ago.

Brian Leppert
Tahoe Model Works
Carson City, NV

please visit   www.resincarworks.com/tahoe.htm


Tony Thompson
 

Andy Carlson wrote:

More years before that I built my first kit which blow me away, a Gould USRA tank car. I never before had a kit assemble so well, so much that it was a pleasure to build. For years these tanks were my favorite freight cars in all of HO, even after the comments from Richard Hendrickson informed me of these model's prototype errors. My favorite part of the build were the frames, and Brian, cudos to you for contributing to that great moment in time.

       I fully agree with Andy about this frame, which is available from Tichy as a separate set of parts, and which I have modified to serve for several tank car bashes. As Andy says, it is a pleasure to work with and easy to change for AB brakes, different tank diameters and lengths, etc. Great work, Brian.

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






Tim O'Connor
 


Richard was quite clear in his philosophy that if something could not easily
be seen - e.g. box car underframes - then they just weren't worth much effort.
As time goes on, I'm not sure that getting everything right on every model is
the point of my own modeling. I love those Gould (Tichy) tank cars, and I am
happy to build them. And truly, who besides me will ever know?

I would he happy if Intermountain would redo the underframe on their Type 27.
Not because it's wrong, but because it's just so mediocre next to the USRA tank
cars!


More years before that I built my first kit which blow me away, a Gould USRA tank car. I never before had a kit assemble so well, so much that it was a pleasure to build. For years these tanks were my favorite freight cars in all of HO, even after the comments from Richard Hendrickson informed me of these model's prototype errors. My favorite part of the build were the frames, and Brian, cudos to you for contributing to that great moment in time.

-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Steve and Barb Hile
 

If someone wants to look for drawings, they may exist at the Pullman Library of IRM.  We have a lot of Standard Steel Car company drawings.  Send an email to
 
 
to get someone started on looking within our files.
 
Steve Hile
Pullman Library Volunteer



From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dave Parker via Groups.Io
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2018 6:48 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Gulf tank cars

Brian:

Please allow me to clarify:

When I said the Tichy frame was too short for the IM 8 kgal tank, what I should have  said is there is a mismatch between between the spacing between the tank saddles on the frame than tank-bands on the body.  As you correctly point out, the cast-on tanks bands would need to be ground off and redone in order to use the frame and the tank as is.  When I look at the broadside view of 3293, the overall length of the two components appears to match.  That said, it seems like maybe we are doing some guessing here.  Are there any actual schematics of the Standard Steel cars, or should we assume they followed the USRA plans exactly for the UF?

That still leaves the issues of dome size, valve spacing, how to handle the tie-downs (which changed over time), etc. but, yes, it seems the IM tank and the Tichy frame could be married if one wanted to undertake such a kitbash.

I am glad that you posted the builder's photo of car 3200 because it allows me to insert a comment that these cars were delivered with KD brakes rather than KC.  Contemporaneous ACF-built cars also had KDs, at least through ~1922, but it is not something I have otherwise seen much on 1920s tank cars.

Dave Parker
Riverside, CA


brianleppert@att.net
 

Dave,

I haven't seen any SSC drawings, but everything in the photos looked to match the USRA underframe drawings, so I just assumed.  The only rivet counting I did was on the duo tank anchors, a unique USRA feature.  They also matched the drawing. 

I wonder if Standard Steel Car Co. built any of the real tank cars for USRA?

And thanks to everyone for their kind words.

Brian Leppert
Carson City, NV


Tony Thompson
 

Brian Leppert wrote:

I wonder if Standard Steel Car Co. built any of the real tank cars for USRA?

   Of course, NO ONE built any tank cars for the USRA . . .

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






Bill Welch
 

I am confused by this discussion, mainly the dimensional discussion. After Richard H's article several years ago shortening the IM tank to fit the Tichy/Gould underframe to model a Pressed Steel tank car for a North American tank car model, Ted Culotta and I put our heads together to create a kit for these cars using a different method, grafting two Tichy U/F's together to get the prototype's correct length because by Richard's admission his technique created a model that was slightly too short. This compromise did not really bother me but I questioned my ability to shorten the tank with two true 90° cuts on each end, whereas I was sure even if was not pretty I could graft the underframes together. Now my good friend Brian is saying there is not much dimensional difference to fit the same tank to the same underframe. Now I am wondering/thinking that the Pressed Steel underframe is slightly longer than the Standard Steel underframe. Is it that simple?

BTW getting the cast-on bands is not a big deal most easily done with a single edge razor blade held at a very low angle followed with sanding and polishing w/600 and 1200 grit sand paper. A spare tank provides replacement rivets where the band is whittled off. It sounds like all that is needed is a nice pattern to be created for the 8K tank and copied in resin and decals.

Bill Welch


brianleppert@att.net
 

Tony,

Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.

Brian Leppert
Carson City, NV


Tom Madden
 

Isn't that what Frank did and I cast several hundred of??  A replacement NATX tank for the Speedwitch kit which Ted included in his later runs of that kit? Or am I missing something.....

Tom Madden


Tony Thompson
 

Brian Leppert wrote:

Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.

    I do already have Steve's book. I would respond that there are several scholarly articles available in the literature which provide excruciating detail from government records on ALL cars ordered by and for the USRA. There is not a single tank car listed in any of them. 
       There were a number of car designs created for the USRA, but only five of them received USRA specification numbers. The tank car is not among them. This and many additional details are readily accessible in sources such as James Lane's article in _Railroad History_ no. 128. That "tank cars were built as part of the war effort," I would not doubt, but that does NOT mean that any such cars followed the USRA design, much less that they were ordered by USRA.
         Steve's assertion that some tank cars were built for USRA has no research foundation that I know of, but I would be intrigued to know more. What, exactly, is the basis of this assertion?

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






Tim O'Connor
 


Tony, it sounds kinda like we're playing with semantics.

Fact: there was a design for a tank car, and Gould followed it.

This FTX 10073 might be a tank car that follows that design.

If that is TRUE, then we must admit that at least one tank car was built
that can be modeled correctly with the Gould kit.

Whether or not this design was PROPOSED or SUBMITTED to USRA is something
of a moot point, since we KNOW (and have said for years) that no tank cars
were built for the USRA.

Disclaimer: I do not have the UTLX book so I have no knowledge of page 125.

Tim O'Connor



Brian Leppert wrote:

Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.

    I do already have Steve's book. I would respond that there are several scholarly articles available in the literature which provide excruciating detail from government records on ALL cars ordered by and for the USRA. There is not a single tank car listed in any of them.
       There were a number of car designs created for the USRA, but only five of them received USRA specification numbers. The tank car is not among them. This and many additional details are readily accessible in sources such as James Lane's article in _Railroad History_ no. 128. That "tank cars were built as part of the war effort," I would not doubt, but that does NOT mean that any such cars followed the USRA design, much less that they were ordered by USRA.
         Steve's assertion that some tank cars were built for USRA has no research foundation that I know of, but I would be intrigued to know more. What, exactly, is the basis of this assertion?

Tony Thompson 

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Steve and Barb Hile
 

Let's see if I can make an explanation that doesn't sound too much like weasel wording.
 
The pictures from the Indiana Historical Society of the Lincoln Oil cars showed up pretty late in my research process.  It may have been Brian, or someone else on the Steam Era Freight Car list that first pointed out FTX 10073 sometime earlier this year.  However, I had no information that would indicate that FTX 10073 ever became an LINX or UTLX car.  In fact, the UTLX records showed that they purchased only 8000 gallon cars from Lincoln Oil.  But the link to FTX 10073 lead to other photos from that site, including the other on on page 125, which shows what UTLX did buy.
 
However, when I searched on the Federal Tank Line, I ran across the attached bond listing
 
 
This states that the Federal Tank Line was incorporated in 1919 for the purpose of acquiring 746 tank cars constructed for and purchased by the US Government in 1918 and 1919 and then leasing them out.
 
I did not fully intend to say that FTX 10073 was a USRA tank car, per se.  The underframe does match the USRA design, while the tank does not.  It certainly would be interesting to see what some of the other cars in the fleet looked like.
 
They certainly also had some ARA Class V tank cars, as is shown in this ORER listing from 1926
 
 
 
The illustration of FTX also appears to be of the USRA style underframe.  The Federal Tank Line listing was gone from the ORER by 1930.
 
We, Ted, Dave Parker and I, discussed the interrelationships between Pennsylvania Tank Car Company, Pennsylvania Iron Works and General American, as the car was, apparently built in Warren, Ohio by General American, but it does not use their Type 17 underframe design.  The tank matches the GATX Type 17 ten thousand gallon tank (think Tangent car.)
 
An interesting kitbash could be pairing the Tangent tank with the Tichy underframe.  If we only knew where the FTX cars cars went....
 
So, is it a USRA car?  The answer is - sort of...
 
At least this explains my statement about Federal Tank leasing USRA tank cars.  At least they were originally owned by the government and some used a USRA underframe design.
 
Probably more information than most of you need.
 
Steve Hile



From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 8:34 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Gulf tank cars


Tony, it sounds kinda like we're playing with semantics.

Fact: there was a design for a tank car, and Gould followed it.

This FTX 10073 might be a tank car that follows that design.

If that is TRUE, then we must admit that at least one tank car was built
that can be modeled correctly with the Gould kit.

Whether or not this design was PROPOSED or SUBMITTED to USRA is something
of a moot point, since we KNOW (and have said for years) that no tank cars
were built for the USRA.

Disclaimer: I do not have the UTLX book so I have no knowledge of page 125.

Tim O'Connor



Brian Leppert wrote:

Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.

    I do already have Steve's book. I would respond that there are several scholarly articles available in the literature which provide excruciating detail from government records on ALL cars ordered by and for the USRA. There is not a single tank car listed in any of them.
       There were a number of car designs created for the USRA, but only five of them received USRA specification numbers. The tank car is not among them. This and many additional details are readily accessible in sources such as James Lane's article in _Railroad History_ no. 128. That "tank cars were built as part of the war effort," I would not doubt, but that does NOT mean that any such cars followed the USRA design, much less that they were ordered by USRA.
         Steve's assertion that some tank cars were built for USRA has no research foundation that I know of, but I would be intrigued to know more. What, exactly, is the basis of this assertion?

Tony Thompson 

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Jim Gates
 

According to GATX: a history of the General American Transportation Corporation, General American purchased Federal Tank Car in 1926. 740 tank cars came with the deal.

Jim Gates

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

On Tue, 11/20/18, Steve and Barb Hile <shile@mindspring.com> wrote:

An interesting kitbash could be pairing the Tangent tank with the Tichy underframe.  If we only knew where the FTX cars cars went....


Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Steve,

Your research is quite interesting. Please allow me to point out some possibilities, all complete speculation on my part.

(a)
Sticking railroads with tank cars might not have worked well for the USRA, as most tanks were operated as privately-owned fleets tailored to the owners' needs.

(b) The Federal Tank Line cars in question might have been first operated by some other agency of the US Government, maybe the Army itself, and were never intended for distribution to railroads by the USRA. If so, they should show up some place in the ORERs of the time, unless they were only used in "on-base" service. If the latter, there might be photos and other documentation in War Department archives (training documents or operating/loading manuals, for example; such materials still exist for the WWII era).

(c) The cars might not have actually been used before WWI ended, but stored for some purpose that never came to pass because of the Armistice. One possibility could have been future use on US Army-operated railroads in Europe. Then they were sold off to FTL as "war surplus".

The documentation on these cars might have been lost long ago. Likely nobody thought it would be of interest to historians a hundred years later, and many such government documents were trashed. Or it might be in some forgotten file folder
totally unconnected with the USRA in the National Archives.

I find the 3500-gallon tanks intriguing. On wonders what such small tanks carried. Maybe it was some especially dense liquid chemical, like later cars used in tetra ethyl service. They might not have even looked like other tank cars.

I love a mystery. I love solutions even more.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

On 11/20/18 1:05 AM, Steve and Barb Hile wrote:
Let's see if I can make an explanation that doesn't sound too much like weasel wording.
 
The pictures from the Indiana Historical Society of the Lincoln Oil cars showed up pretty late in my research process.  It may have been Brian, or someone else on the Steam Era Freight Car list that first pointed out FTX 10073 sometime earlier this year.  However, I had no information that would indicate that FTX 10073 ever became an LINX or UTLX car.  In fact, the UTLX records showed that they purchased only 8000 gallon cars from Lincoln Oil.  But the link to FTX 10073 lead to other photos from that site, including the other on on page 125, which shows what UTLX did buy.
 
However, when I searched on the Federal Tank Line, I ran across the attached bond listing
 
 
This states that the Federal Tank Line was incorporated in 1919 for the purpose of acquiring 746 tank cars constructed for and purchased by the US Government in 1918 and 1919 and then leasing them out.
 
I did not fully intend to say that FTX 10073 was a USRA tank car, per se.  The underframe does match the USRA design, while the tank does not.  It certainly would be interesting to see what some of the other cars in the fleet looked like.
 
They certainly also had some ARA Class V tank cars, as is shown in this ORER listing from 1926
 
 
 
The illustration of FTX also appears to be of the USRA style underframe.  The Federal Tank Line listing was gone from the ORER by 1930.
 
We, Ted, Dave Parker and I, discussed the interrelationships between Pennsylvania Tank Car Company, Pennsylvania Iron Works and General American, as the car was, apparently built in Warren, Ohio by General American, but it does not use their Type 17 underframe design.  The tank matches the GATX Type 17 ten thousand gallon tank (think Tangent car.)
 
An interesting kitbash could be pairing the Tangent tank with the Tichy underframe.  If we only knew where the FTX cars cars went....
 
So, is it a USRA car?  The answer is - sort of...
 
At least this explains my statement about Federal Tank leasing USRA tank cars.  At least they were originally owned by the government and some used a USRA underframe design.
 
Probably more information than most of you need.
 
Steve Hile


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 8:34 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Gulf tank cars


Tony, it sounds kinda like we're playing with semantics.

Fact: there was a design for a tank car, and Gould followed it.

This FTX 10073 might be a tank car that follows that design.

If that is TRUE, then we must admit that at least one tank car was built
that can be modeled correctly with the Gould kit.

Whether or not this design was PROPOSED or SUBMITTED to USRA is something
of a moot point, since we KNOW (and have said for years) that no tank cars
were built for the USRA.

Disclaimer: I do not have the UTLX book so I have no knowledge of page 125.

Tim O'Connor



Brian Leppert wrote:

Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.

    I do already have Steve's book. I would respond that there are several scholarly articles available in the literature which provide excruciating detail from government records on ALL cars ordered by and for the USRA. There is not a single tank car listed in any of them.
       There were a number of car designs created for the USRA, but only five of them received USRA specification numbers. The tank car is not among them. This and many additional details are readily accessible in sources such as James Lane's article in _Railroad History_ no. 128. That "tank cars were built as part of the war effort," I would not doubt, but that does NOT mean that any such cars followed the USRA design, much less that they were ordered by USRA.
         Steve's assertion that some tank cars were built for USRA has no research foundation that I know of, but I would be intrigued to know more. What, exactly, is the basis of this assertion?

Tony Thompson 

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


David
 

I did not fully intend to say that FTX 10073 was a USRA tank car, per se.  The underframe does match the USRA design, while the tank does not.

It should be noted that the drawings for the USRA tank designs do show 5 radial courses as an alternate construction.

David Thompson


al.kresse <water.kresse@...>
 

Garth,


When did the white fleet of DOWX tank cars operate? . . . late-1960s? This is a Gene Huddleston slide that I am trying to bracket dating on.


Al

On November 20, 2018 at 5:47 AM Garth Groff <sarahsan@...> wrote:

Steve,

Your research is quite interesting. Please allow me to point out some possibilities, all complete speculation on my part.

(a)
Sticking railroads with tank cars might not have worked well for the USRA, as most tanks were operated as privately-owned fleets tailored to the owners' needs.

(b) The Federal Tank Line cars in question might have been first operated by some other agency of the US Government, maybe the Army itself, and were never intended for distribution to railroads by the USRA. If so, they should show up some place in the ORERs of the time, unless they were only used in "on-base" service. If the latter, there might be photos and other documentation in War Department archives (training documents or operating/loading manuals, for example; such materials still exist for the WWII era).

(c) The cars might not have actually been used before WWI ended, but stored for some purpose that never came to pass because of the Armistice. One possibility could have been future use on US Army-operated railroads in Europe. Then they were sold off to FTL as "war surplus".

The documentation on these cars might have been lost long ago. Likely nobody thought it would be of interest to historians a hundred years later, and many such government documents were trashed. Or it might be in some forgotten file folder
totally unconnected with the USRA in the National Archives.

I find the 3500-gallon tanks intriguing. On wonders what such small tanks carried. Maybe it was some especially dense liquid chemical, like later cars used in tetra ethyl service. They might not have even looked like other tank cars.

I love a mystery. I love solutions even more.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

On 11/20/18 1:05 AM, Steve and Barb Hile wrote:
Let's see if I can make an explanation that doesn't sound too much like weasel wording.
 
The pictures from the Indiana Historical Society of the Lincoln Oil cars showed up pretty late in my research process.  It may have been Brian, or someone else on the Steam Era Freight Car list that first pointed out FTX 10073 sometime earlier this year.  However, I had no information that would indicate that FTX 10073 ever became an LINX or UTLX car.  In fact, the UTLX records showed that they purchased only 8000 gallon cars from Lincoln Oil.  But the link to FTX 10073 lead to other photos from that site, including the other on on page 125, which shows what UTLX did buy.
 
However, when I searched on the Federal Tank Line, I ran across the attached bond listing
 
 
This states that the Federal Tank Line was incorporated in 1919 for the purpose of acquiring 746 tank cars constructed for and purchased by the US Government in 1918 and 1919 and then leasing them out.
 
I did not fully intend to say that FTX 10073 was a USRA tank car, per se.  The underframe does match the USRA design, while the tank does not.  It certainly would be interesting to see what some of the other cars in the fleet looked like.
 
They certainly also had some ARA Class V tank cars, as is shown in this ORER listing from 1926
 
 
 
The illustration of FTX also appears to be of the USRA style underframe.  The Federal Tank Line listing was gone from the ORER by 1930.
 
We, Ted, Dave Parker and I, discussed the interrelationships between Pennsylvania Tank Car Company, Pennsylvania Iron Works and General American, as the car was, apparently built in Warren, Ohio by General American, but it does not use their Type 17 underframe design.  The tank matches the GATX Type 17 ten thousand gallon tank (think Tangent car.)
 
An interesting kitbash could be pairing the Tangent tank with the Tichy underframe.  If we only knew where the FTX cars cars went....
 
So, is it a USRA car?  The answer is - sort of...
 
At least this explains my statement about Federal Tank leasing USRA tank cars.  At least they were originally owned by the government and some used a USRA underframe design.
 
Probably more information than most of you need.
 
Steve Hile


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 8:34 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Gulf tank cars


Tony, it sounds kinda like we're playing with semantics.

Fact: there was a design for a tank car, and Gould followed it.

This FTX 10073 might be a tank car that follows that design.

If that is TRUE, then we must admit that at least one tank car was built
that can be modeled correctly with the Gould kit.

Whether or not this design was PROPOSED or SUBMITTED to USRA is something
of a moot point, since we KNOW (and have said for years) that no tank cars
were built for the USRA.

Disclaimer: I do not have the UTLX book so I have no knowledge of page 125.

Tim O'Connor



Brian Leppert wrote:

Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.

    I do already have Steve's book. I would respond that there are several scholarly articles available in the literature which provide excruciating detail from government records on ALL cars ordered by and for the USRA. There is not a single tank car listed in any of them.
       There were a number of car designs created for the USRA, but only five of them received USRA specification numbers. The tank car is not among them. This and many additional details are readily accessible in sources such as James Lane's article in _Railroad History_ no. 128. That "tank cars were built as part of the war effort," I would not doubt, but that does NOT mean that any such cars followed the USRA design, much less that they were ordered by USRA.
         Steve's assertion that some tank cars were built for USRA has no research foundation that I know of, but I would be intrigued to know more. What, exactly, is the basis of this assertion?

Tony Thompson 

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


 


 


Eric Hansmann
 

Part of FTX 8223 can be seen in the lower right corner of this April 1926 image. This is a companion image to the one I sent the other day with the boxcars. The photo is documenting the removal of the old Millvale Street Bridge before a new one is built. The facilities in the foreground are a Gulf Refining distribution warehouse.

 

After the page opens, click on the image and look for four buttons in the upper left corner of the photo. Click on the right button to make the image full screen so you can zoom in on the details.

 

https://historicpittsburgh.org/islandora/object/pitt%3A715.261175.CP

 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 

 

 

 


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Steve and Barb Hile
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 12:05 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Gulf tank cars

 

Let's see if I can make an explanation that doesn't sound too much like weasel wording.

 

The pictures from the Indiana Historical Society of the Lincoln Oil cars showed up pretty late in my research process.  It may have been Brian, or someone else on the Steam Era Freight Car list that first pointed out FTX 10073 sometime earlier this year.  However, I had no information that would indicate that FTX 10073 ever became an LINX or UTLX car.  In fact, the UTLX records showed that they purchased only 8000 gallon cars from Lincoln Oil.  But the link to FTX 10073 lead to other photos from that site, including the other on on page 125, which shows what UTLX did buy.

 

However, when I searched on the Federal Tank Line, I ran across the attached bond listing

 

 

This states that the Federal Tank Line was incorporated in 1919 for the purpose of acquiring 746 tank cars constructed for and purchased by the US Government in 1918 and 1919 and then leasing them out.

 

I did not fully intend to say that FTX 10073 was a USRA tank car, per se.  The underframe does match the USRA design, while the tank does not.  It certainly would be interesting to see what some of the other cars in the fleet looked like.

 

They certainly also had some ARA Class V tank cars, as is shown in this ORER listing from 1926

 

 

 

The illustration of FTX also appears to be of the USRA style underframe.  The Federal Tank Line listing was gone from the ORER by 1930.

 

We, Ted, Dave Parker and I, discussed the interrelationships between Pennsylvania Tank Car Company, Pennsylvania Iron Works and General American, as the car was, apparently built in Warren, Ohio by General American, but it does not use their Type 17 underframe design.  The tank matches the GATX Type 17 ten thousand gallon tank (think Tangent car.)

 

An interesting kitbash could be pairing the Tangent tank with the Tichy underframe.  If we only knew where the FTX cars cars went....

 

So, is it a USRA car?  The answer is - sort of...

 

At least this explains my statement about Federal Tank leasing USRA tank cars.  At least they were originally owned by the government and some used a USRA underframe design.

 

Probably more information than most of you need.

 

Steve Hile

 


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim O'Connor
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 8:34 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Gulf tank cars


Tony, it sounds kinda like we're playing with semantics.

Fact: there was a design for a tank car, and Gould followed it.

This FTX 10073 might be a tank car that follows that design.

If that is TRUE, then we must admit that at least one tank car was built
that can be modeled correctly with the Gould kit.

Whether or not this design was PROPOSED or SUBMITTED to USRA is something
of a moot point, since we KNOW (and have said for years) that no tank cars
were built for the USRA.

Disclaimer: I do not have the UTLX book so I have no knowledge of page 125.

Tim O'Connor




Brian Leppert wrote:


Get a copy of Steve Hile's new UTLX book and look at page 125 for the photo of FTX 10073 and read the caption on the opposite page.  I'll argue that's a tank car BUILT to the USRA drawings FOR the USRA.


    I do already have Steve's book. I would respond that there are several scholarly articles available in the literature which provide excruciating detail from government records on ALL cars ordered by and for the USRA. There is not a single tank car listed in any of them.
       There were a number of car designs created for the USRA, but only five of them received USRA specification numbers. The tank car is not among them. This and many additional details are readily accessible in sources such as James Lane's article in _Railroad History_ no. 128. That "tank cars were built as part of the war effort," I would not doubt, but that does NOT mean that any such cars followed the USRA design, much less that they were ordered by USRA.
         Steve's assertion that some tank cars were built for USRA has no research foundation that I know of, but I would be intrigued to know more. What, exactly, is the basis of this assertion?

Tony Thompson 


--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Bill Welch
 

From an Aug. 22, 2010 post by Richard H. a reminder of how to use the Tichy four-course tank: "What the Gould/Tichy tank car model CAN be used for, with some relatively easy modifications, is to represent the "war emergency" USG-A class tank cars built by AC&F for the Army Quartermaster Corps and for Shippers Car Line during Wolrd War II, as well as for some cars of the same design built in Canada for Canadian General Transit; the "war emergency" design essentially consisted of USRA-design tanks on 1940s AC&F standard underframes. In the past, there have been a couple of magazine articles by myself and by Russ Pinchbeck on making this conversion."

Are there any prototype photos of these War Emergency tank cars?

Bill Welch