(Not A Freight Car) Slanted Loading Dock
|
Schleigh Mike
Hello Group! I think I walked on that platform fewer years back than Garth and stepped inside the building to see the display therein. The platform was not sloped. Regards----Mike Schleigh usually in Grove City, Penna.
On Thursday, May 30, 2019, 4:45:32 PM EDT, Garth Groff <sarahsan@...> wrote:
Dennis, I don't have the complete building, but here are two partial views from about 15 years ago (with their NATX tank car for group content). The dock appears flat as a piece of paper. Yours Aye, Garth Groff On 5/30/19 2:34 PM, Dennis Storzek
wrote:
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 06:17 PM, Eric Hansmann wrote: Well that photo certainly makes clear the amount of pitch of the loading dock. Look at the piles of boxes on the dock, and how out of plumb they are sitting. Now that we can see the whole arrangement, I wonder if that isn't the oil house for the whole facility. Back in those days the philosophy was drainage rather than spill containment, and that pitch would certainly have any spills draining out onto the ground rather than pooling on the floor. Steamtown National Historic Site in Scranton has preserved a DL&W oil house that they use as a book store; it's one of the few original buildings on the site. I recall it has a loading dock, but I don't recall the pitch of the floor, nor can I find a photo of it. Dennis Storzek
|
|
|
|
Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
Dennis,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I don't have the complete building, but here are two partial views from about 15 years ago (with their NATX tank car for group content). The dock appears flat as a piece of paper. Yours Aye, Garth Groff
On 5/30/19 2:34 PM, Dennis Storzek
wrote:
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 06:17 PM, Eric Hansmann wrote:
|
|
|
|
Charlie Vlk
All- I hesitated to mention it, but since we’re still commenting on the photo, the caption says However, I would hate to have to roll a dolly or handtruck of material out of a car and up that slope to the floor of the building….controlling it on the dock would be fun as well!!! Charlie Vlk
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dennis Storzek
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 06:17 PM, Eric Hansmann wrote:
Well that photo certainly makes clear the amount of pitch of the loading dock. Look at the piles of boxes on the dock, and how out of plumb they are sitting.
|
|
|
|
Dennis Storzek
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 06:17 PM, Eric Hansmann wrote:
Well that photo certainly makes clear the amount of pitch of the loading dock. Look at the piles of boxes on the dock, and how out of plumb they are sitting. Now that we can see the whole arrangement, I wonder if that isn't the oil house for the whole facility. Back in those days the philosophy was drainage rather than spill containment, and that pitch would certainly have any spills draining out onto the ground rather than pooling on the floor. Steamtown National Historic Site in Scranton has preserved a DL&W oil house that they use as a book store; it's one of the few original buildings on the site. I recall it has a loading dock, but I don't recall the pitch of the floor, nor can I find a photo of it. Dennis Storzek
|
|
|
|
Eric Hansmann
Thanks for your notes, Dennis. The photo angle and lighting made it difficult to see the truss rod details, even after some Photoshop massaging. I did notice the bolts below the coupler striker but thought those were mainly the striker attachment hardware. I did not realize they were associated with an inner pair of truss rods.
Thanks also for the notes on identifying steel centersills based upon draft sills. This will be handy when reviewing pre-1930s freight car photos.
Eric Hansmann Murfreesboro, TN
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dennis Storzek
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 10:15 AM, Donald B. Valentine wrote:
I disagree, I think iy is a four truss rod car, and we can only see the near side rods. The inner rods are quite close to the center sills, as evidenced by the placement of their terminating nuts on the striker casting, and therefore are quite far from the outer rods. If uou look carefully under the car you can see the brake cylinder on the near side of the center sills, and the queenpost on the inner truss rod is quite close behind the brake rod that that runs to the lever on the near end of the brake cylinder. We can only see halfway under the car.
|
|
|
|
Eric Hansmann
This might be the other photo in question. The Lackawanna boxcar is off to the right distance beside the locomotive. The brick storehouse is adjacent. I like the high walkway PTX tank car. http://lists.railfan.net/erielack-photo/erielack-05-26-19/X6994.jpg Eric Hansmann
On May 29, 2019 at 4:07 PM Jack Mullen <jack.f.mullen@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Jack Mullen
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 08:45 AM, Bob Chaparro wrote:
Actually, there is at least one other photo of a completely different sceneI don't know what photo you think is different, but it appears that all photos in this set are views of the same group of buildings, in back of the roundhouse. Identifiable buildings appear in multiple pictures. Jack Mullen
|
|
|
|
Dennis Storzek
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 10:15 AM, Donald B. Valentine wrote:
From a second look I think you are right about only two truss rods on the DL&W boxcar,I disagree, I think iy is a four truss rod car, and we can only see the near side rods. The inner rods are quite close to the center sills, as evidenced by the placement of their terminating nuts on the striker casting, and therefore are quite far from the outer rods. If uou look carefully under the car you can see the brake cylinder on the near side of the center sills, and the queenpost on the inner truss rod is quite close behind the brake rod that that runs to the lever on the near end of the brake cylinder. We can only see halfway under the car. I also don't think the car has a steel centersill. If the car had been improved with steel sills, they would have included the draft sills, indeed one common improvement before the advent of steel center sills was steel replacement draft sills, as the draft sills tended to be the weakest part of the underframe. The construction visible at the end of the car still clearly has wood sills; the ends show, bolted below that cast striker, with the drawbar carry iron bolted to the bottom of the sills. That end is a proprietary item, shown in the 1922 CBC. Given that there is no initials above the number, I bet the CBC illustration of of a DL&W car. Dennis Storzek
|
|
|
|
Dave Parker
If I were at home, I could look at my December, 1935, ORER and tell you which of the DL&W truss-rod shorties survived the 1934 purge of WUF cars. For example, none of the B&M cars survived, but some roads did invest in UF reinforcements to extend car life.
I think consulting a later Register, say 1945 or so, yields an ambiguous answer, as shorties in general were scrapped in such large numbers in and around the WWII years. Dave Parker Riverside, CA
|
|
|
|
Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
From a second look I think you are right about only two truss rods on the DL&W boxcar, Eric. Your version of the photo shows the underbody details a bit better and tells me that part of what I Thought earlier was the continuation of the board "locking" the turnbuckles in place was actually the closer part of the further truss rod after the board has passed through it's turnbuckle. But you suggest the possibility of the car not having a steel underframe. If that is the case could it be that two more rods of the same size were simply run the length of the car just to hold it together longitudaly? Look at the casting that forms the upper part of the coupler pocket, please. The two nuts at its outer extremities appear to be the same size as those on the truss rod ends. What else could they be doing if not holding the entire length of the car together? A neat car, anyway you view it! Cordially, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
The dock to the RIGHT in the photo is clearly a ramp going off to the right - you can see the horizontal floor lines do not line up. The area in front of the car is slightly sloped rather than flat. A slope is a easier for loading cars and it also sheds spilled liquids and water onto the tracks. Tim O'
On 5/28/2019 7:08 PM, Bob Chaparro via
Groups.Io wrote:
--
Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 07:15 AM, Eric Hansmann wrote:
...the negative is markedthe negative is marked "Site of inspection shed DL&W electrification at Hoboken." Actually, there is at least one other photo of a completely different scene that is marked the negative is marked "Site of inspection shed DL&W electrification at Hoboken." Maybe it's a company facility, maybe not.
|
|
|
|
prgm_mgr
Almost looks like a shed that was converted to a dock.
Interesting details on car end and trucks too. Mark Kraus
|
|
|
|
Eric Hansmann
DL&W 31830 is among the 31000-33999 series listed in the October 1926 ORER. These were 30-ton capacity cars with 1,806 cars in service. In the historic Lackawanna photo, we can see two truss rods attached to the end sills. I'm not entirely certain if these cars have a steel centersill or underframe. The ORER listing is inconclusive as there are no ditto marks to continue the Steel Underframe note through several 30-ton capacity boxcar series. The ditto appears under Box on an earlier entry but not Steel Underframe. The car ends are interesting and make these shortys stand out but I've seen few of them off line. Based upon the light rating and possibly lack of a steel centersill, I think these boxcars may have been used for LCL and Company service during the 1920s on the Lackawanna. The car is sitting at a company facility as the negative is marked "Site of inspection shed DL&W electrification at Hoboken." http://lists.railfan.net/erielack-photo/erielack-05-26-19/X6991.jpg
FYI, there are 6,837 30-ton capacity boxcars in adjacent car series that are listed as Box in the 1926 ORER. The data offers no clear indication of a steel underframe. Many other DL&W listings are marked as Box, Steel Underframe, including quite a few more 30-ton cars.
Eric Hansmann Murfreesboro, TN
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Donald B. Valentine via Groups.Io
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 6:33 AM To: main@realstmfc.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] (Not A Freight Car) Slanted Loading Dock
The slight slope on that dock makes perfect sense to me, Bob. Most docks I have seen were wood and uncovered but if concrete is used and it is covered why not use a slight slope so that any wind borne rain that blows in can drain easily. But the heck with the dock, LOOK at that neat DL&W boxcar! Note not only the Carmer cut levers but the neat castings to prevent the nuts on the ends of the truss rods from cutting into the wood. The two more central ones do not need these because they come through the end of the casting forming the upper part of the coupler pocket and shared by the ends of both. And once again look at the board through the turnbuckles to lock them in place and keep them from losing tension from vibration as I pointed out in another such photo a year or two a ago here. Wood ladder stiles, simple wrought iron rungs and note the cut out in the fascia for the retainer. Just wish I could see the beam a little better that the queen posts are mountedon. What a neat car! I'd love to see a Kadee quality version of this one and would quickly buy 4 or 5.
Cordially, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
The slight slope on that dock makes perfect sense to me, Bob. Most docks I have seen were wood and uncovered but if concrete is used and it is covered why not use a slight slope so that any wind borne rain that blows in can drain easily. But the heck with the dock, LOOK at that neat DL&W boxcar! Note not only the Carmer cut levers but the neat castings to prevent the nuts on the ends of the truss rods from cutting into the wood. The two more central ones do not need these because they come through the end of the casting forming the upper part of the coupler pocket and shared by the ends of both. And once again look at the board through the turnbuckles to lock them in place and keep them from losing tension from vibration as I pointed out in another such photo a year or two a ago here. Wood ladder stiles, simple wrought iron rungs and note the cut out in the fascia for the retainer. Just wish I could see the beam a little better that the queen posts are mountedon. What a neat car! I'd love to see a Kadee quality version of this one and would quickly buy 4 or 5. Cordially, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
Paul Doggett
Those were my thoughts also.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Paul Doggett. England 🏴
On 29 May 2019, at 00:39, Patrick Wade <patwadesb@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Patrick Wade
My first thought is that it makes it easier to roll barrels and kegs onto freight cars. It would be interesting to see if there are any sort of guides on the deck to direct the barrels to the car door way. Bur I have never seen any other slanted docks. Pat Wade Santa Barbara, CA
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 4:08 PM Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io <chiefbobbb=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote:
|
|
|
|
I noticed the loading dock in this photo (which does feature a freight car) has a pronounced slant: http://lists.railfan.net/erielackphoto.cgi?erielack-05-26-19/X6991.jpg This is the first slanted loading dock I've seen. Is such a design highly unusual or just not so common? Bob Chaparro Hemet, CA
|
|
|