Topics

Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

Donald B. Valentine
 

Thank you Todd. That's what I was thinking too and made most famous by Johnny Cash's rendition of it on
Sam Phillips Sun label.

Cordially, Don Valentine

Todd Sullivan
 

Jack Mullen wrote

"And when the driver think he safely on the other side
  He shouts back down the line to the man and he says
 I fooled you, I fooled you
 I got pig iron, I got pig iron
 I got all pig iron

You just can't mention stock cars and pig iron without invoking Lonnie Donegan."

Or Huddie Ledbetter ('Leadbelly') who originated those lyrics in the the song, "Rock Island Line".

Todd Sullivan

David
 

As for Pennsylvania Tank Car, I have seen start dates of?? 1911 and 1914, both without any solid attribution.?? There are some indications that they used built-up tank bolsters on some cars, but I have never seen a confirmed PTCCo car with anything like what we are discussing here.

I compiled some info from Pennsylvania Tank Line's ORER entries the last time this topic came up:

Pennsylvania Tank Line first appears in the February 1912 ORER with a picture of PTX 1001:
https://play.google.com/books/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&id=QRs6AQAAMAAJ&pg=GBS.RA1-PA522

Their entry used a picture of PTX 1061 by December 1912:
https://play.google.com/books/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&id=tboMAQAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA998

In May 1915, the picture changed to PTX 1091. Decent picture here:
https://play.google.com/books/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&id=ZPg4AQAAMAAJ&pg=GBS.RA1-PA849

The change to the "new" underframe appeared on PTX 3500 in May 1917:
https://play.google.com/books/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&id=O_c4AQAAMAAJ&pg=GBS.RA1-PA915

The more familiar cast tank saddles seem to have started circa 1918.

David Thompson

Dave Parker
 

To expand a little on what Steve Hile said about YS&T 110 (and TKX 700):

Standard Car (later Tank Car) Company commenced operations in April of 1916; it was the name change that dates to 1919.  Judging from their seminal publication "All About Tank Cars" (both 1919, 1921 editions), I don't believe that Standard ever built any MCB Class II cars, as the May, 1917, mandate for Class III cars was so imminent.  Since the two cars in question here are clearly Class IIs, I am skeptical that Standard built them, although the built-up tank bolsters certainly say "Standard".  There are four similar Class II cars with "high walkways" in Ted's SEFCRM vol. 2 but, absent some evidence beyond the bolster design that they were actually Standard-built, I remain dubious about these as well.  Perhaps there was some "engineering philosphy" associated with these earlier cars that somehow found it's way into Standard's design team.

As for Pennsylvania Tank Car, I have seen start dates of  1911 and 1914, both without any solid attribution.  There are some indications that they used built-up tank bolsters on some cars, but I have never seen a confirmed PTCCo car with anything like what we are discussing here.

As for Don's comment about the Rube Goldberg running board design, this raises some questions (that I can't fully answer) about the safety appliance standards for tank cars.  Based on AC&F's transition from the their Type 7 to the Type 11 (in ~1911), I have long assumed that the 1911 Safety Appliances Act banned the "high walkway design".  But a reread of the safety appliances section in the 1911 MCB annual proceedings doesn't really support this notion.  To date, the only place I have found good drawings is in the 1918 MCB Standards and Recommended Practices.  There, a tank car without end-sills (as is the case with YS&T 110) is shown with what I would call "intermediate height" running boards, as per the UTLX Class V and X designs.  Cars with end-sills are still shown with the high running boards as an allowable option, but I suspect this is something that was grandfathered back to MCB Class II cars (and perhaps some unknown cutoff date).  The MCB/ARA Specifications for Tank Cars strongly imply that anything built to the Class III standard had to have the low running boards and end platforms that we are so used to seeing (and the photographic evidence certainly agrees).

This is a long way of saying I don't know who built the two tank cars discussed in this thread, but I guess I have some strong opinions about who didn't.  Contrary evidence is of course welcome, as is any clarification about exactly how/when the 1911 SAA affected running-board design.

--
Dave Parker
Swall Meadows, CA

Benjamin Hom
 

Don Valentine asked:
"...what class is the Pennsy #532885 boxcar seen in this photo?"

Class X23.  Not likely to be mistaken for anything else.


Ben Hom

Donald B. Valentine
 

Bruce Smith, what class is the Pennsy #532885 boxcar seen in this photo? Is the roof slope really as flat as it appears or is it just my view of it?  Also forgot to note earlier folks, not the sign on the utility pole, "DANGER Do Not Drink Water Polluted" with a bottom line I cannot read but the sign has got to be a first, especially in that era.

Cordially, Don Valentine

Donald B. Valentine
 

    There are several htings that stand out to me in this photo. Since the tank car is the primary reason the photo has been posted let's take it first. Were the walkways for this car designed by Rube Goldberg out on a drunk or some kindergarten kid? I look at the four straps around the tank and underframe and really wonder how well they could hold things together in ANY accident, let along
one in which the car was rolled over. Then I not the two 1/2 circumferential straps, one on either side of the dome to help support
the walkway. Noting two nuts on the underside of each strap supporting said walkway I presume it is only two boards wide. But
look at all of these pieces attached to the four circumferential and two 1/2 circumferential straps. There appear to be no rivets or
bolts showing to make this connection. Could it have been done by welding at this early period? Perhaps it's the lighting and the
shadows but I am really curious about this in the teens, judging by the May 1913 builders date on the Lackawanna GM class gon.
And look at the gon itself! When I think of gons from this time frame the ubiquitous Pennsy G22 gons always come to mind but
this Lackawanna gon appears to be constructed like a battleship in comparison! The heavy fishbelly underframe and the number
and spacing of side braces shown give it a very substantially constructed look even if lumber is used for the sheathing. There must
be a minimum of 15 on each side if not 16. Then there are the strap metal stake pockets bolted to the wood sheathing that always
look so neat on some of the early gons. I'd love to find the blueprints for that early gon as it would make an excellent model subject. Then I scroll to the far right and look at the Reading boxcar, all steel even at this early date. This and the gon make the
TKX tank car and old Pennsy boxcar look rather puny in construction to my eye. The Bettendorf T-section trucks on the gon lend to that impression as well when compared to the arch bar trucks looking like they came from the local smithy under the tack car.

Perhaps a different view of things, Don Valentine

al_brown03
 

The TKX bolsters sure look like Standard Tank designs. I wish one could see the YS&T bolsters a little more from the side: that "porthole" in the bolster is a Standard Tank spotting feature.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

earlyrail
 

Jack Mullen
 

On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 07:35 PM, Claus Schlund \(HGM\) wrote:
See also the image below, from the Republic Steel collecion, showing ERIE stock cars apparently used for loading pig iron.
  And when the driver think he safely on the other side
  He shouts back down the line to the man and he says
 I fooled you, I fooled you
 I got pig iron, I got pig iron
 I got all pig iron

You just can't mention stock cars and pig iron without invoking Lonnie Donegan.

Jack Mullen

Tony Thompson
 

Steve  Hile wrote:

There was some symbiotic relationship between Pennsylvania Tank Car Company and Standard Tank Car Company, with PTC being the older (1914 versus 1919).  I had some discussions after publishing the UTLX book over the identification of the Ohio Cities Gas Company, International Refinery tank cars shown on page 135.  It seems more likely that those cars (and the Youngstown Sheet and Tube car being discussed) were built by PTC before STC really got going.  

        Certainly during the 1920s STC was far bigger than PTC, and we know that zPTC bought tanks from STC to put on its own underframes. But the early high-walkway tanks we are discussing are not likely to be part of that situation. They seem to me far more likely to be PTC cars.

Tony Thompson



Steve and Barb Hile
 

There was some symbiotic relationship between Pennsylvania Tank Car Company and Standard Tank Car Company, with PTC being the older (1914 versus 1919).  I had some discussions after publishing the UTLX book over the identification of the Ohio Cities Gas Company, International Refinery tank cars shown on page 135.  It seems more likely that those cars (and the Youngstown Sheet and Tube car being discussed) were built by PTC before STC really got going.  STC continued to use the heavy built up underframe and tank saddle with the lowered running boards while PTC came up with a new underframe design in the 1920's.
 
GATC eventually purchased both and concentrated activity at the Sharon, PA STC plant.
 
Steve Hile



From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bruce Smith
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2019 10:30 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

David,

My first impression was that the frame was classic Standard Tank Car, not PTC. To me, the bolsters scream STC. Can you clarify as to why you think it is PTC?

Regards,
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of David via Groups.Io <jaydeet2001@...>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2019 7:44 AM
To: RealSTMFC@groups.io <RealSTMFC@groups.io>
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
 
YS&T 110 is the type of car that Pennsylvania Tank Car was building in
the early-mid Teens. The car behind it appear to be an early (pre-1917)
GATC tank.

David Thompson



Bruce Smith
 

David,

My first impression was that the frame was classic Standard Tank Car, not PTC. To me, the bolsters scream STC. Can you clarify as to why you think it is PTC?

Regards,
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of David via Groups.Io <jaydeet2001@...>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2019 7:44 AM
To: RealSTMFC@groups.io <RealSTMFC@groups.io>
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car
 
YS&T 110 is the type of car that Pennsylvania Tank Car was building in
the early-mid Teens. The car behind it appear to be an early (pre-1917)
GATC tank.

David Thompson



David
 

YS&T 110 is the type of car that Pennsylvania Tank Car was building in the early-mid Teens. The car behind it appear to be an early (pre-1917) GATC tank.

David Thompson

Garth Groff <sarahsan@...>
 

Claus,

I'm pretty sure this ISN'T an AC&F type 11 car. The lack of end platforms and the shape of the tank support/bolsters speak against this. There were a number of knock-off high-walkway tank car designs from other manufacturers, but AFAIK this topic has not been well researched. High walkway do not always mean AC&F.

Maybe our tank car geeks can comment further.

Yours Aye,


Garth Groff

On 9/20/2019 11:46 PM, Claus Schlund &#92;(HGM&#92;) wrote:
Hi List Members,
 
There is a second image showing this car, unusual underframe design...
 
 
Claus Schlund
 
----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 9:20 PM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

Hi List Members,
 
Some might enjoy this image of this Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car YS&T 110.
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
There is a second image showing this car, unusual underframe design...
 
 
Claus Schlund
 

----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 9:20 PM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

Hi List Members,
 
Some might enjoy this image of this Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car YS&T 110.
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
I wish we had a little better focus on this image, but there is still a lot to be seen in this yard view. Click on image and use on-screen tools to enlarge.
 
 
Claus Schlund
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

Hi List Members,
 
See also the image below, from the Republic Steel collecion, showing ERIE stock cars apparently used for loading pig iron.
 
 
Claus Schlund
 
 
----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 9:20 PM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

Hi List Members,
 
Some might enjoy this image of this Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car YS&T 110.
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
See also the image below, from the Republic Steel collecion, showing ERIE stock cars apparently used for loading pig iron.
 
 
Claus Schlund
 
 

----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 9:20 PM
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car

Hi List Members,
 
Some might enjoy this image of this Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car YS&T 110.
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund
 
 

Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
 

Hi List Members,
 
Some might enjoy this image of this Youngstown Sheet & Tube tank car YS&T 110.
 
 
Enjoy!
 
Claus Schlund